SRI JIBAN KRUSHNA BEHERA, MEMBER (I/C)
The Complainant has filed this complaint petition, U/s-35 of C.P. Act, 2019, (here-in- after called as the “Act”) alleging a “deficiency-in-service” by the Ops, where OP No.1 is the SDE (Electrical) RE-1, CED, Balasore and OP No.2 is the Junior Manager, Rupsa Electrical Section, Rupsa.
2. The case of the complainant, in a nutshell, is that the he is a senior citizen and bonafide domestic consumer under the Ops bearing Consumer A/c No.11222003462. In the year 2008, due to heavy flood affected in their area, the house of the complainant was completely damaged and the electricity connection to his house was disconnected. After construction of new house, the Ops installed a new meter on his house and as per consumption, the complainant used to pay the electricity dues. In spite of regular payment of energy dues, the Ops have demanded to pay arrear amount of Rs.75,978.36 paisa in the Bill for the month of October, 2011. Thus, the complainant sought for a clarification from the Ops on 11.1.2022 through the PIO concerned as per application under the RTI Act to which the Deputy Manager (Electrical), RE-1, Sub-Division, Balasore vide his letter No.269 dated 10.2.2022 intimated that there was no such amount in his electric bill in their ledger, but total bill up to December, 2017 was Rs.75,449.32 paisa. It is further stated that although the complainant paid Rs.22,500/-, the Ops have not reflected the said deposits in the Bill. It is further averred that the Ops have played an unfair trade practice by way of demanding huge amount without any basis. Moreover, the staffs of the Ops are threatening to disconnect the power supply to the premises of the complainant unless the arrear amount is paid.
The cause of action to file the present case arose on 18.2.2022, when the complainant received the letter No.269 dated 10.2.2022 from the PIO, Central Electrical Division, Balasore.
To substantiate his case, the complainant relied upon the following documents, which are placed in the record -
- Photocopy of payment receipt dated 27.1.2022.
- Photocopy of electric bill dated 17.1.2022.
- Photocopy of payment receipt dated 19.2.2022.
- Photocopy of electric bill dated 12.2.2022.
- Photocopy of disputed electricity bill dated 4.12.2021.
- Photocopy of RTI application.
- Photocopy of reply to the RTI application along with enclosure.
- Photocopy of payment receipts dated 31.03.19, 25.03.15, 23.03.20.
3. In the present case, the Ops have appeared and filed their written version. The Ops have stated in their written version, inter alia, that the complainant is a domestic consumer having contract demand of 1 KW load. The meter bearing No.214182 installed became defective prior to 2008. Due to non-availability of new meter, the complainant was asked to purchase a new meter, but he failed to do the same. Thus, under the tariff provision load factor bills @ 144 units per month was raised and accordingly the bills were served to the complainant continuously and the complainant without paying the energy charges consuming the electricity. When the collection squad going to disconnect the service connection, he deposited Rs.7,500/- on 25.3.2015, Rs.1,500/- on 28.3.2016, Rs.500/- on 25.10.2016, Rs.5,000/- on 31.3.2019, Rs.402/- on 22.1.2020 and Rs.10,000/- on 23.3.2020 against the outstanding dues of Rs.74,370.42 paisa up to February, 2020. Thereafter, in the month of January, 2020, new meter was installed in his premises. As the consumption pattern recorder in the said meter became low, on query, the concerned Lineman informed that the complainant has consuming electricity by way of hooking in the night. However, taking into consideration the average consumption of the new meter, the load factor bills has been revised and an amount of Rs.58,735/- has been withdrawn against the total bill up to March, 2022 and the balance Rs.8,706/- is required to be paid by the complainant. Under the aforesaid grounds, it is prayed by the Ops to dismiss or dropped the case with cost. In support of their case, no document is relied on by the Ops.
4. In view of the above averments, the points for determination in this case are as follows:-
- Whether the complainant is a consumer or not?
- Whether there is any cause of action to file this case?
- Whether the present case is maintainable?
- Whether there is any deficiency of service on the part of the Ops?
- To what other relief(s), the complainant is entitled to?
F I N D I N G S
5. First of all, it is to be decided as to whether the complainant is a consumer under the Ops or not. No doubt, the complainant is a domestic consumer under the Ops. The Ops have also admitted that the complainant is a consumer under them. That apart, documents filed under Annexure-1 to 11 prove itself that the complainant is a consumer under the Ops. Therefore, it is held that the complainant is a consumer.
6. For the sake of convenience and for better appreciation, issue No.ii to v are taken up together. Before delve into the merit of the case, it is felt necessary to discuss as to whether the area of the complainant especially the house of the complainant was affected by flood in the year 2008, as submitted by his learned counsel. As it is seen from the case record, the complainant has to prove that any flood was actually affected the house of the complainant. Had the house of the complainant been collapsed in the flood in question, the complainant might have given aid by the State Government or by any other charitable organization. Not a single document is produced before the Commission to prove at least the house of the complainant was collapsed in the alleged flood. Thus, the plea taken by the complainant that in the flood of 2008 his house was damaged or submerged has got no evidentiary value at all.
7. Learned counsel for the complainant urged that In spite of regular payment of energy dues, the Ops have demanded to pay arrear amount of Rs.75,978.36 paisa in the Bill for the month of October, 2011. Thus, the complainant sought for a clarification from the Ops on 11.1.2022 through the PIO concerned as per application under the RTI Act to which the Deputy Manager (Electrical), RE-1, Sub-Division, Balasore vide his letter No.269 dated 10.2.2022 intimated that there was no such amount in his electric bill in their ledger, but total bill up to December, 2017 was Rs.75,449.32 paisa. It is further stated that although the complainant paid Rs.22,500/-, the Ops have not reflected the said deposits in the Bill. It is further averred that the Ops have played an unfair trade practice by way of demanding huge amount without any basis. Moreover, the staffs of the Ops are threatening to disconnect the power supply to the premises of the complainant unless the arrear amount is paid.
8. On the other hand, learned counsel for the Ops submitted that the meter bearing No.214182 installed became defective prior to 2008 and due to non-availability of new meter, the complainant was asked to purchase a new meter, but he failed to do the same. Thus, under the tariff provision load factor bills @ 144 units per month was raised and accordingly the bills were served to the complainant continuously and the complainant without paying the energy charges consuming the electricity. When the collection squad going to disconnect the service connection, to avoid disconnection, the complainant deposited Rs.7,500/- on 25.3.2015, Rs.1,500/- on 28.3.2016, Rs.500/- on 25.10.2016, Rs.5,000/- on 31.3.2019, Rs.402/- on 22.1.2020 and Rs.10,000/- on 23.3.2020 against the outstanding dues of Rs.74,370.42 paisa up to February, 2020. Thereafter, in the month of January, 2020, new meter was installed in his premises. As the consumption pattern recorder in the said meter became low, on query, the concerned Lineman informed that the complainant has consuming electricity by way of hooking in the night. However, taking into consideration the average consumption of the new meter, the load factor bills has been revised and an amount of Rs.58,351/- has been withdrawn against the total bill up to March, 2022 and the balance Rs.13,071/- is required to be paid by the complainant.
9. In the backdrop of above rival pleadings of the parties, this connection is of the considered view that the Ops have already decided the matter, as admitted by the Ops in their written version and considering the long pending issue with reference to the guidelines, the average consumption of the new meter, the load factor bills has been revised and a sum of Rs.58,351/- up to March, 2022 has already been adjusted and claimed the balance amount of Rs.13,071/- from the complainant. Further, the plea taken by the complainant that the Deputy Manager (Electrical), RE-1, Sub-Division, Balasore vide his letter No.269 dated 10.2.2022 (Annexure-7) has intimated that the Electric Bill Ledger maintained in the office shows no such outstanding amount of Rs.75,978/- which gave rise to invoke jurisdiction of this Commission. On perusal of Annexure-7, it came to light that the Deputy Manager, Electrical, RE-1, Sub-Division, Balasore has intimated the PIO- cum-Estimator, CED, Balasore stating that there is no such amount of Rs.75,978/- in his Electric Bill in their ledger, but the total bill up to December, 2017 is Rs.75,449.32 paisa. Therefore, the stand of the complainant, as stated, has got no value. Sum how, the complainant has filed the present complaint with a prayer to restrict the Ops from demanding Rs.75,978/-, but as discussed earlier, now the Ops have only claimed a sum of Rs.13,071/- which is a very meagre amount to be paid by the complainant. That a part, the complainant has also failed to satisfy that he sustained any kind of loss or damage due to the unfair trade practice committed by the Ops by demanding huge amount. In the light of the above discussion, it is held that the complainant has no cause of action to file the present complaint. Consequently, the complaint is not maintainable. The complainant is also not entitled to get any compensation, as claimed for in this case.
Hence, it is ordered –
O R D E R
The complaint of the complainant be and the same is dismissed on contest against Ops. In the facts and circumstances, no order as to costs.
Pronounced in the open Court of this Commission on this day i.e. the 28th day of November, 2023 given under my Signature & Seal of the commission.
