MR. PRABODHA KUMAR DASH, PRESIDENT-
Heard the Ld. Counsel for the Complainant, and Ld. Counsel for the Opp.Parties. Perused the documents on record filed in the said C.C.Case No. 26/2019.
The Ld. Counsel for the Complainant argued that, the Opp.Parties No.2 has assessed U/S-126 of electricity Act,2003 which is illegal and not sustainable in eye of law and referred Honbl’e High Court Judgement on W.P.(c) No. 13047/2017, M/S Global Feeds vs. Manoj Kumar Das wherein the ratio decided that, a licensee’s Franchisee can’t be act as assessing officer either provisional assessment as well as for final assessment.
The Ld. Counsel for Opp.Parties defended such action of Franchisee on the ground/under the Act,2003 ‘Franchisee’ (Enzen) authorized its officer by virtue of an agreement with the licensee, therefore the jurisdiction can’t be questioned. The Franchisee Company Enzen rightly imposed penalty assessed for an amount of Rs. 16,321.34 by assessing officer Junior Engineer, Danpur on Dt. 03/06/2018.
Hence, we found the penalty by way of assessment imposed upon the Complainant U/S-126 of Electricity Act, 2003 to a tune of Rs. 16,321.34 is illegal and not sustainable in eye of law and it is a fit case before us to interfere with the power vested with Honbl’e Dist. Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission can be exercise for redressal of consumer grievances by this quasi-judicial body.
ORDER
Hence, it is ordered that, the assessment imposed upon the complainant by Enzen Global Solution Pvt. Ltd. Kendrapara Division No.1 Sub-Division-II, dt. 03.06.2018 amount of Rs. 16,321.34 imposed on Complainant is hereby quashed.
The C.C.Case is accordingly disposed off.
Pronounced in the open Court, this the 25th day of April,2022.
I, agree.
Sd/- Sd/-
MEMBER PRESIDENT
