| Final Order / Judgement | DATE OF FILING : 21.12.2015. DATE OF S/R : 04.02.2016. DATE OF FINAL ORDER : 15.02.2017. Shri Abhijit Nath, son of Gourhari Nath, residing at village & P.O. Ramnagar, P.S. Shyampur, District Howrah, PIN 711 314. .. ….…. .…………………………………………… COMPLAINANT. The Station Manager, WBSEDCL, Ajodhya Customer Care Center Ajodhya, Belpukur, Shyampur, District Howrah, PIN 711314…………. ……………..……………………………OPPOSITE PARTY. P R E S E N T Hon’ble President : Shri B. D. Nanda, M.A. ( double ), L.L.M., WBHJS. Hon’ble Member : Smt. Jhumki Saha. Hon’ble Member : Shri A.K. Pathak. F I N A L O R D E R - This is an application U/S 12 of the C.P. Act, 1986 filed by the petitioner, Shri Abhijit Nath, praying for a direction on the o.p. no. 1, Station Manager, WBSEDCL, Ajodhya CCC Ajodhya, Belpukur, Shyampur, praying for a direction upon the o.p. to recall the bill dated 27.8.2015 / 30.11.2015 and to pay compensation of Rs. 1,00,000/- for causing mental agony and harassment.
- The case of the petitioners is that under the self employment scheme he runs one ice cream factory under the name and style ‘Bapi Ice Candy’ at Ramnagar, P.S. Shyampur. The petitioner had been enjoying electricity though commercial meter no. GF 712048, Consumer I.D. no. 100509713 with consumer no. F052248. The meter was installed in the factory premises of the petitioner on 28.4.2012 and since then he has been paying bills upto date till July, 2015 when the O.P. raised a bill amounting to Rs. 2,43,319/- and asked the petitioner to pay. Such a bill is illegal and arbitrary. The average consumption of the petitioner is about 4000 units per quarter but in the present bill the amount to be paid for the month of August, 2015 being Rs. 82,692.27p. and for September, 82,664.58p and in October, 2015 the payment amount is Rs. 82,664.58p. The petitioner wrote a letter to the o.p., WBSEDCL, requesting them to allow special rebate. There was never any outstanding against the said meter. Again the o.p. sent another bill on 30.11.2015 amounting to Rs. 2,57,805/-. The claim of the o.p. is false and so the petitioner files this case praying for compensation of Rs. 1 lakh and also praying before the Court for recalling the said bills.
- The o.ps., WBSEDCL, contested the case by filing a written version denying the allegations made against them and submitted that the case is not maintainable and the petitioner has no cause of action to file case. They further submitted that during the quarterly meter reading the reader engaged by the o.p. raised meter reading of phase I only instead of cumulative phase reading. Later during supervisory meter reading by the representative of the WBSEDCL on 20.8.2015 the bill was generated as per cumulative meter reading. It is further stated that the performance of the meter is correct and a series meter was installed against the main meter and it is observed that both the meters recorded the same reading. Thus the complainant is not entitled to get any relief as prayed for and the present case be dismissed with costs.
- Upon pleadings of parties the following points arose for determination :
- Is the case maintainable in its present form ?
- Whether the petitioner has any cause of action to file the case ?
- Whether the alleged bill issued by o.p. no. 1 is arbitrary and illegal ?
- Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of the O.Ps., WBSEDCL Ltd. ?
- Whether the complainant is entitled to get any relief as prayed for ?
DECISION WITH REASONS : - All the issues are taken up together for the sake of convenience and brevity for discussion and to skip off reiteration. In support of her case the petitioners filed affidavit as well as the documents showing his meter card with his date of connection on 28.4.2012 and it was a commercial meter. The petitioner also filed the alleged bill dated 27.8.2015 showing the due amount being more than Rs. 2.5 lakhs and the bill dated 15.11.2015 showing the outstanding Rs. 2,62,797/-. He has not filed any documents regarding his payment since 2012 that his consumption was less all along and just filed one bill for the month of May, 2012 amounting Rs.2,809/- and bill for March, 2015 amounting to Rs. 9,21/- No original documents have been filed in support of his case that his consumption was 4000 units per quarter. However, the bill for the month April, 2012 showing payment ofRs. 7,800/- and again payment of April, 2012 showing Rs. 16,338/-. Whatever may be the payments made by the petitioners this Forum should not entertain the bill disputes and disputes in respect of meter as per the law laid down by the Apex Court.
- Our Supreme Court in the case of CESC Vs. N.M. Banka, opined that the Consumer Forum cannot entertain electricity bill dispute. Our National Commission also opined in the same tune in the case of Biswanath Mukherjee vs. West Bengal State Electricity Board stating that the correct course of action for a consumer with a dispute regarding the correctness of electricity meter or of billed electricity consumption is to apply to the electrical inspector designated as per the provision of the Indian Electricity Act, 1910. In the instant case also it was a clear case of electricity bill dispute but the petitioner did not approach the electrical inspector designated and instead he approached the District forum challenging the legality of the bill though the o.p. categorically stating that there was no dispute in the meter and a parallel meter was installed in the factory of the petitioner and there is no fact in the instant case that the petitioner approached the electrical inspector designate and rather he straight way approached this Forum which cannot pass any order in his favour as our Supreme Court opined that Consumer Forum cannot entertain electricity bill dispute.
In the result, the application fails. Court fee paid is correct. Hence, O R D E R E D That the C. C. No. 449 of 2015 be and the same is dismissed on contest without costs against the O.P. Supply the copies of the order to the parties, free of costs. DICTATED & CORRECTED BY ME. ( B. D. Nanda ) President, C.D.R.F., Howrah. | |
