Orissa

Jajapur

CC/45/2017

Sri Natabar Behera - Complainant(s)

Versus

Sub-divisional Officer(Elect) . - Opp.Party(s)

13 Nov 2017

ORDER

                IN THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, JAJPUR.

                                                        Present:      1.Shri Jiban ballav Das , President

                                                                            2.Sri Pitabas Mohanty, Member,

                                                                            3.Miss Smita Ray, Lady Member.                       

                                              Dated the 13^th  day of November,2017.

                                                      C.C.Case No.45  of 2017

Sri Natabar Behera   S/O Late Duryodhan Behera

At  .Motorngapal , P.O. Jajpur ,

P.S/ Dist.-Jajpur.                                                                            …… ……....Complainant .                                                                       .

                   (Versus)

1.Sub-Divisional Officer, (Elect) No.1,Sub-divison ,NESCO,Jajpur Town , Dist. Jajpur.

2.Executive Engineer (Elect) NESCO, Jajpur Town.

                                                                                                                            ……………..Opp.Parties.                  

For the Complainant:                           Self.

For the Opp.Parties :                            Self.

                                                                                                     Date of order:  13.11.2017.

SHRI PITABAS  MOHANTY,  MEMBER  .

Deficiency in energy service is the grievance of the petitioner .

            The fact stated by the petitioner in the complaint petition in short is that the petitioner is a domestic electric consumer under the O.ps vide consumer No.JTT 2367 . As per ledger  copy an arrear of  Rs.43510.35  is outstanding up to May-2017 against the petitioner  but as per the calculation of the petitioner there is no outstanding against him rather the NESCO authority will refund amount that has been paid previously due to wrong calculation of energy billing through a defective meter . Further  from October-2009  after installing a new meter the billing has been drawn  as per  actual consumption and the petitioner was satisfied  with the  billing pattern and paid  the electricity  dues regularly of the current consumption .It is pertinent to mention here that the O.P after  declaring  the previous meter no.113183  as defective  had charged  energy bill without replacing the same with a new meter .   During October-01  the meter bearing no.13183 was declared   defective and the same meter was reflects status OK various time from October- 01 to August-09 . During  October-01 to August-02  the meter bearing No.113183  was defective  from September 02 to june-03  the same meter was declared OK without any basis and  again the same meter was declared  defective from  july-03 to December-04. Durinfg these  periods  reading are taken  without any basis or  logic . Hence the arrear derived in the illegal manner through a defective meter  without any logic and basis  as  load factor for which the petitioner was  not liable to pay and the same shall be withdrawn. 

Accordingly  finding no other alternative the petitioner  has knocked the door of this Fora with the prayer to direct the O.Ps  to revise the energy bill from October-09 to  November-09 on the  basis of average consumption  as  per Regulation  97  of OERC-2004  and  the billing  done from October-2000 to September -01 may be recalculated by taking initial reading 12 and final reading 1233, the average comes to ( 1233 /12) = 103 units per month.

            The O.Ps  entered  appearance and filed  their written version   taking the following stands:

            It is true that the consumer no.JTT 2367 stand in the name of Duryodhan Behera .

It is true that Rs.4351.35 is outstanding against the petitioner .it is true that the meter bearing no.048577 ( make palmohan) was installed during Oct-09 and from that period the billing of the consumer has been drawing on the basis of actual meter reading. Prior to this, no request has been received for rectification of wrong billing ( as per statement of the petitioner). Prior to oct-09 the meter bearing No.113183 was installed and it was installed during oct-Noc-2000. From October-2000 to August-09 the same meter (meter no.113183 ) was continued and due to clerical error the meter bearing no.113183 was shown as LF billing and OK billing for some periods.  That an energy meter once declare defective could not give normal consumption after declaration as defective. It could be possible only when meter is declare defective for some other reason i.e due to clerical error ( for non technical reason) .it is astonished  why the petitioner did not lodge complain at that time and after 3 years knocking the door of the Hon’ble forum. As the same meter( bearing No.113183 was continued from oct-2000 to oct-09 ,the bill of the consumer may be revised with taking initial reading as 12 at the opening of Jan’01 and 24648 at the end of August’09. The Regulation 97 of OERC -2004 has been come into force from April-2004 and prior to this, the regulation was not mandatory.

            Accordingly the petitioner has filed the present case without any merit and the prayer of the petitioner may pleased be dismissed.  

On the date of hearing we heard the argument from both the sides.  After perusal of the record and documents filed from both the sides we observed  that :

It is undisputed fact that the petitioner is a consumer under the O.Ps  vide  Consumer  No. JTT 2367.

It is also undisputed fact that  the petitioner paid  the electricity  dues regularly  as per meter reading after the new meter baring no. 048577 was installed in the premises of the petitioner by the O.Ps .

The next  point to consider that whether the bill calculated by the O.P  as per available ledger copy from November-2000  to sept-2009 is tenable as per law. After verifying the ledger copy it is cristal clear that the O.Ps  prepared maximum months of electricity  bill  on the  load factor  basis or by the defective meter  . in this point it is our considered view that this attitude of the O.Ps violates  the Regulation -86 and 93(8)  of  OERC Code-2004  but also  contrary to  observation of Hon’ble National Commission reported in 2008(2) CPR-318-N.C and the Hon’ble supreme court reported in 1997 (1) CLT-435-S.C ,wherein it is held that:

            “ in case bill is not prepared as per meter reading it is deficiency in service “.

  for which the petitioner suffered mental agony and harassment .

Hence this order

            Without taking adverse inference  the prayer of the petitioner is allowed . The O.Ps are  directed  to recalculate  the electricity  bill  as per prayer of the petitioner  in the complaint petition. The petitioner also directed to pay the outstanding amount if any within one month after receipt of the revised  bill. No cost.         

            This order is pronounced in the open Forum on this the 13th day of November,2017. under my hand and seal of the Forum.