Tamil Nadu

Thiruvarur

CC/15/2014

D.Sivakumar - Complainant(s)

Versus

The AE, Vigilance TNEB, No 1. Thanjavur,TEDC,Thanjavur.And Two others. - Opp.Party(s)

Party in Person

24 Mar 2015

ORDER

                                                                                                                                Date of Filling:30.04.2014.

                                                                                                                                  Date of Disposal:24.03.2015.

 

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, TIRUVARUR.

 

THIRU.P.G.RAJAGOPAL, B.A.B.L.,                   PRESIDENT.

THIRU.R.RAMESH.B.COM.,M.A.,                  MEMBER-1

TMT.K.SIVASANKARI.B.SC.,M.C.A.,M.Phil., MEMBER-2

CC/15/2014

DECIDED ON THIS 24^th  DAY OF  MARCH 2015.

 

D.Sivakumar

S/o M.Durairaj

No.30, Lakshmi Nagar,

Bommannanpalayam,

Coimbatore – 641 046.                                                                     Complainant

                                                             Versus

1. Assistant Engineer,

Vigilance Section, TNEB,

No.1, Thanjavur Vallam Road,

Thanjavur Electric Distribution Circle,

Thanjavur – 613 007.

2. Assistant Engineer,

Operation & Maintenance,

Tamil Nadu Electricity Board,

Kumbakonam.

3. Assistant Engineer,

Tamil Nadu Electricity Board,

Alangkudi, Valngaiman Taluk.                                                 Opposite Parties

 

This complaint coming up for final hearing on 09.03.2015 upon

perusing the complaint, and other material papers on record and on hearing the arguments of Thiru.D.Sivakumar, party in person and  Thiru.R.Saravanaselvan, the learned Government pleader for the opposite parties and having stood over till this day for consideration this Forum made the following

 

ORDER

By President, Thiru.P.G.Rajagopal,B.A.,B.L.,

 

                        This complaint is filed by the complainant u/s 12 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986.

                        2.The gist of the complaint  filed by the complainant is that he has got 3 acres of agricultural lands at the Valangaiman Taluk and  paddy seedlings were damaged by rats,he encircled the fields with electrified wire to prevent the damage being done by the rats and at that time, the opposite parties charged the complainant for unauthorized use of electricity and imposed the penalty at Rs.12,580/- towards compensation charges and Rs.1,000/- towards compounding charges and the said amount was unlawfully recovered from him.  The opposite parties have acted in a biased manner and they have in case of another agricultural consumer one Gnanaprakasam, consumed  electricity from the borewel of one Sakthivel and the Anti-Power Theft squad assessed Rs.60,000/- for reconnection subsequently the complainant came to know through Right to Information Act, that only a sum of Rs.7,120/- and compounding charges alone had been recovered from the said Gnanaprakasam. The disconnection of the service connection of the complainant by the opposite party and recovery the compensation charges is sheer deficiency of service on their part and the complainant therefore prays for the refund of the sum of Rs.13,580/- paid  by him and to pay Rs.72,000/- towards the loss incurred by him in the paddy cultivation, Rs.1,00,000/- towards compensation for his mental agony and Rs.5,000/- towards litigation expenses of this Forum, totaling Rs.2,00,580/-.

                        3. The gist of the written version filed by the 3^rd opposite party and adopted by the 1^st and 2^nd opposite parties is that as the complainant used electricity in an unauthorized manner by installing the electrified wire for preventing damage to his paddy seedling by the rat’s in an unauthorized manner the sum of Rs.12,580/- towards compensation charges and Rs.1,00,000/- towards compensation compounding charges totaling Rs.13580/- was recovered from him and it was paid by the complainant for the unauthorized use of electricity in accordance with the penal provisions of the Electricity Act.  The recovery of the compensation charges and the compounding charges for the unauthorized use of the electricity by the complainant cannot be categorized as his deficiency of service.

                        4. Only for his unauthorized usage of electricity, the complainant had to pay compensation charges and the compounding charges.  If he is aggrieved over the quantum of the charges levied by the opposite parties,he ought to have preferred only an appeal before the prescribed authorities of the Tamil Nadu Electricity Board.  The complaint is therefore liable to be dismissed.

                        5. The complainant has filed his proof affidavit reiterating all the averments made in the complaint and as filed 13 documents which are marked as Exhibits A1 to A13.  The 3^rd opposite party has filed his proof affidavit and filed 1 document which is marked as Exhibit B1.  Written arguments have been submitted by the both the sides.

6. Points for consideration:

1. Whether there is deficiency of service on the part of the opposite parties?

2. Whether the complainant is entitled to any relief? If so what?

                        7.Point 1: The main allegation of the complainant is that a sum of Rs.12,580/- towards compensation charges and Rs.1,000/- towards compounding charges have been unlawfully recovered by the opposite parties on the pretext of his using unauthorized use of electricity for formation of electrified wire encircling his field to prevent damage to the paddy seedlings by the rats and the opposite parties have acted in a biased manner by recovering only Rs.1,000/- from one Gnanaprakasam, who also was alleged to have used unauthorized use of electricity and thus the opposite parties are deficient in their service and therefore liable to pay compensation and to refund the charges recovered from him.

                        7. The complainant has filed Exhibit A1, the bill for purchase of ADT 45 paddy seeds on 01.06.2013, Exhibit A2, the Xerox copy of the receipt for payment of Rs.12,580/- towards compounding charges and Rs.1,000/- towards compounding charges, Exhibit A3, the working sheet for energy theft case in the case of energy stolen levied at 584 Units, the compensation charges have been fixed at Rs.12,580/- and compound charges at Rs.1,000/-, Exhibit A4, the 2 bills dated 27.09.2013 and 28.09.2013 issued by the Shakthi Argo Harvester in evidence of the date of  harvest of the paddy by the complainant, Exhibit A5, is the copies of the series of complaint sent by the complainant to the Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Departments of the Tamil Nadu Electricity Board Trichy, the Divisional Engineer, Kumbakonam, the Executive Engineer, Kumbakonam, Assistant Engineer, TNEB, Alangudi, Kumbakonam and the enforcement unit, Exhibit A6, Photographs showing the fields and the electricity pump motor shed of the complainant, Exhibit A7, the information given by the Executive Engineer, TNEB, Kumbakonam to the complainant under the Right to Information Act, Exhibit A8, another information sent by the Executive Engineer, Kumbakonam, under the Right to Information Act., Exhibit A9, the inspection report and warning sheet relating that the unauthorized use of electricity by one Gnanaprakasam for having used electricity to running another one HP Motor in addition to the agricultural pump sets, Exhibit A10, the 4 receipts issued by the electricity Board for payment of charges by the said Gnanaprakasam, Exhibit A11, the letter sent by the 3^rd opposite party to the complainant in connection with the temporary change of name to the agricultural service connection, Exhibit A12, the handreceipt given by the Assistant Engineer, the 1^st opposite party to the complainant and Exhibit A13, is the copy of the letter dated 26.07.2013 sent by the complainant to the 2^ndand 3^rd opposite parties.  On the side of the opposite parties the working sheet for energy theft case of the complainant along with the inspection report is filed as B1.

8. The unauthorized use of electricity by the complainant in encircling his

field by electrified wire to prevent the rats’ damaging his paddy seedling is not denied by the complainant.  He has not challenged the validity of Exhibit A3, the inspection report and working sheet relating to his unauthorized use of electricity.  Therefore the collection of compensation charges and compounding charges by the opposite parties from the complainant for his unauthorized use of electricity for installing electrified wire cannot be categorized as the deficiency of service on their part.  It is pure discharging of their official duty.  It is only the complainant who being a wrong doerhas filed this complaint with an ulterior motive.  The another allegation of the complainant that the opposite party had been biased in their duty by recovering only Rs.7,120/- towards compensation charges and Rs.1,000/- towards compounding charges from one Gnanaprakasam while he was originally charged for Rs.60,000/- is not at all proved.  Exhibit A9 filed by the complainant which is the inspection report and working sheet for energy theft case of Gnanaprakasam has given  the particulars of assessment which reveal the compensation charges to be Rs.7,120/- and compounding charges at Rs.1,000/-.  There is no proof for the allegation of the complainant that Gnanaprakasam was originally charged Rs.60,000/- and subsequently he was made to pay only Rs.7,120/- and Rs.1,000/-. Therefore there is no bonofide in the complaint filed by the complainant.  There is no deficiency of service on the part of the opposite parties, who have just discharged their official duty promptly.

                        9. Point 2: In the result the complaint is dismissed.  There is no order as to costs.

 

This order is dictated by me to the Steno-Typist, transcribed and typed by

him and corrected and pronounced by me on this 24^th day of March 2015.

MEMBER   I                                              PRESIDENT                             MEMBER   II

LIST OF  DOCUMENTS FILLED BY THE COMPLAINANT:

Ex. A1/ Dt.:01.06.2013: Cash Bill for the purchase of paddyseeds by the complainant.

Ex. A2/ Dt.20.07.2013: The Xerox copy of the receipts for payment of compensation

charges and compounding charges.

Ex. A3/ Dt.19.07.2013:The Xerox copy of the Inspection report and the working sheet

for energy theft case of the complainant.

Ex. A4/ Dt.:27 & 28.09.2013:Xerox copy of the receipts issued by the Shakthi Agro

Harvester.

Ex. A5/ Dt.03.02.2014: Xerox copy of the series of petitions sent by the complainant to

the officer of the Vigilance and Anti-Coruption, TNEB and other

officials.

Ex. A6/ Dt.                 : The photographs showing the field and motor pump shed of the

complainant.

Ex. A7/ Dt.14.11.2013:The reply sent by the Executive Engineer O & M kumbakonam to

the complainant under the Right to Information Act.

Ex. A8/ Dt.29.11.2013: The reply given by the Executive Engineer to the complainant

Ex. A9/ Dt.30.09.2013: The inspection report with working sheet for energy theft case of

Thiru.Gnanaprakasam.

Ex. A10/ Dt.10.10.2013:Xerox copies of the 4 receipts for payment of compensation

charges and compounding charges by Gnanaprakasam.

Ex. A11/ Dt.05.12.2003:The Xerox copy of the letter sent by the 3^rd opposite party to the

complainant regarding temporary name transfer for his service

connection.

Ex. A12/ Dt.19.07.2013: Hand receipt given by the 1^st opposite party to the complainant

        for compounding charges.

Ex. A13/ Dt.26.07.2013: The Xerox copy of the letter sent by the complainant to the 3^rd

        opposite party

 

Document filed by the 3^rd opposite party

Ex.B1:19.07.2013: The Xerox copy of the Inspection report with working sheet for

Energy theft case of the complainant.

 

 

EMBER   I                                               PRESIDENT                             MEMBER   II