Fact of the case in short is that this Complainant is the Consumer under the O.P. having Consumer no.200320099 and was paying regular electric bill, according to meter reading.  Subsequently, Complainant noticed that his electric meter was out of order.  So, he applied for its replacement by a new one.

Thereafter, this Complainant was given absurd estimated bill amounting to Rs.12968/-  during the period when electric meter showing consumption of electricity for the period May – 2015 to July – 2015 was out of order.

Thereafter, this Complainant made application to the Divisional Manager, WBSEDCL on 04-12-2015 for the rectification of the said bill ; but all are vain. 

So, this Complainant has filed this case and prays for passing order directing O.P. to rectify case bill and to issue rectified, reasonable bill for the period May – 2015 to July – 2015.

In this case O.P. appeared ; but did not file any W.V. and abandoned this case.  So, this case was heard exparte.

In this case following documents have been marked as exhibits for Complainant :-

1) Exhibit – 1 series are the copy of Electric Bills.

2)  Exhibit – 2 series are the copy Meter Card.

                                                                  Decision with reasons.

This case is being conducted by Complainant in person.

In this case Complainant argued inter alia that his ordinary consumption of electricity under this case service connection was within 366-units in three months ; but this O.P. sent exorbitant bill of Rs.12,968/- on the basis of average consumption / calculation.  This Complainant never consumed such units as claimed in the impugned bill.  So, he prays for asking O.P. to give afresh bill after rectification of impugned bill by making calculation of consumption reasonably on the basis of previous consumption of electricity.

We have heard the submissions made by the Complainant.

It appears from exhibit – 1(a) which is the impugned bill and it reveals from this impugned bill that in the column unit consumption is incorporated 0.00 that means there was no data in the hand of the O.P. about the consumption unit by the Complainant for the month bill August – 2015 to October – 2015.  So, we said that impugned bill was prepared for the period when case meter was out of order.

We find from exhibit – 1(b) which is a bill for the billing month November – 2015, December – 2015 and January – 2016 and as per this bill unit consumed 176 units under the case service connection.

It also reveals from exhibit – 1(c) which is a bill and billing month August – 2016 to October – 2016 units consumed 342 units.  Exhibit – 1D is the bill billing for the month May – 2015 to July – 2015 units consumed 350 units.

We also find from other exhibit – 1(e), 1(f), 1(g), 1(h) and 1(i) that this Complainant consumed 372 units, 248 units, 175 units, 258 units and 366 units in three months but; it goes to show from impugned bill exhibit – 1(a) that Rs.12,968/- has been claimed showing units consumed 00 units in three months August – 2015 to October – 2015.  There is nothing in the impugned bill to state what provision was adopted to prepare impugned bill (Exhibit – 1a), claiming Rs. 12,968/- for 0.00 units consumption.

Considering the previous and post consumption of electricity of the impugned bill exhibit – 1(a) we find that this Complainant never consumed any units valued at Rs.12,968/-  in three months.

So, we hold that the Complainant has been able to prove that the impugned bill exhibit – 1(a) has been prepared claiming Rs.12,968/- in three months showing units consumed 00 units is without basis and baseless and exhibitory.

So, we do not find any reason to disbelieve the unchallenged statement / averment made in the petition of complaint.  So, we hold Complainant has been able to prove his case.

In view of the above facts & circumstances we hold that the impugned bill exhibit – 1(a) billing for the month August – 2015 to October – 2015 having consumer ID no. 200320099 is arbitrary and baseless, excessive and exaggerated.   So, the assessment made in the impugned bill by the O.P. is hereby should be declared as void, arbitrary, etc.

Considering above facts and circumstances we are of the opinion that if O.P. is directed to prepare bill for the disputed period as provided in clause 16.8 of Tariff notification of 1993 and in view of observation of Hon’ble High Court reported in AIR 2002 JHAR then none would be prejudiced.

O.P. is Station Manager, WBSEDCL is a Govt. undertaking concerned.  So, in view of observation of Hon’ble NCDRC reported in 2015 (1) CPR page 56(NC) we do not like to impose any cost or compensation.

In the result, case succeeds.

Hence, it is

                                                                                   Ordered

That the Complaint Case no.04 of 2016 be and same is hereby allowed exparte against O.P. Station Manager, WBSEDCL but; without cost.

The impugned bill billing for the month August – 2015 to September – 2015 exhibit – 1(a) in respect of consumer ID no. 200320099 is hereby declared as void, arbitrary and exaggerated, excessive and without any legal basis.

O.P. WBSEDCL  is hereby directed to assess consumption of electricity and to prepare electricity bill afresh for the disputed period i.e. August – 2015 to October – 2015 on the basis of average consumption of electricity according to meter reading of the case service connection for the corresponding three months of previous year consumption prior to

period when meter was out of order or on the basis of average consumption of previous three months prior to month when meter was out of order whichever is highest and to send the same to the Complainant asking him to pay the same within two months from the date of receipt of the bill.

If any amount is paid against impugned bill by Complainant that shall be deducted / adjusted from the amount of the bill which will be prepared afresh on the basis of direction made in this Judgement.

Complainant is hereby directed to go on paying the current bill after the installation of new meter to the O.P. WBSEDCL according to bill issued by O.P.; and also to pay the amount of fresh bill for disputed period within its due date and O.P. is directed to receive the same.

If the Complainant fails to pay the amount of fresh bill prepared on the basis of direction of the Judgement within the stipulated period as mentioned in the bill then O.P. is at liberty to proceed with this matter according to law.

If O.P. fails to prepare / bill afresh as directed in this Judgement within the stipulated period, that Complainant is at liberty to get the direction / order implemented with due course of law.

O.P. is hereby directed not the disconnect the case service connection for non-payment of  electric bill in question declared as void, exaggerated and baseless ; but he has liberty to disconnect the case service connection if Complainant fails to pay the amount of afresh bill for disputed period within its due date.

Let plain copy of this Judgement be given to the both sides and another plain copy of Judgement be also sent by registered post with A.D. to the O.P. for Complainant with direction made in the Judgment.