Ld. Advocate are present. The judgement is ready and pronounced in open Commission.

BY - SRI.SAURAV CHANDRA, MEMBER

1. Brief facts of the Complainant’s case are that the Opposite Party is an Electricity Service Provider from whom the Complainant applied for a New Service Connection. The Op after making the field enquiry and being satisfied issued a Quotation for Rs.948.00 by asking the Complainant to pay at the Op’s Office.

2. After receiving the payment in full, the Op installed a service connection in the house of the Complainant but, after one day all on a sudden the Op disconnected the service connection without assigning any reason.

3. The Complainant severally tried to know the reason for such disconnection by the Op but, the Op kept mum and since then, the Op has not restored the service connection to the house of the Complainant which amounts to gross negligence and deficiency of service.

4. Subsequently, a case has been lodged by the Op against the father of the Complainant but, as per the Anticipatory Bail Order passed by the Hon’ble High Court Calcutta, the father of the Complainant paid Rs.37,957.00 i.e. @50% of the provisional assessment bill on 03.02.2022.

The Complainant, therefore, prays for:-

1. To Install the essential Electricity Connection at the Shop-cum-House of the Complainant by the Op with immediate effect.

2. To pay a Compensation of Rs.30,000.00 to the Complainant by the Op for gross negligence and gross deficiency in service.

3. To pay a Litigation Cost of Rs.10,000.00 to the Complainant by the Op for conducting the case.

4. Any other order as the Commission may deem fit and proper.

5. The Op being represented by its’ Learned Advocate has contested the case by filing Written Version against the Complaint. While resisting the claim of the Complainant, the Op in its’ Written Version stated inter alia that this complaint is not maintainable as per the provision of the Consumer Protection Act. Moreover, this case is barred by limitation. The Complainant suppressed the material facts and the Complaint is completely untrue, false, imaginary, frivolous, vexatious and baseless as claimed by the Complainant in the Paragraph No.1 to 8 of the Complaint. Therefore, there is no Cause of Action.

6. The actual fact is Complainant and his father resides in the same house premises. On 06.01.2022 when the Complainant deposited the quotation money for his new service connection, a theft of electricity was detected on the same day at the said premises where the Complainant also applied for new service connection and a FIR was lodged before the Panskura Police Station against his father on 06.01.2022 u/s 135(1)(a) of the Electricity Act, 2003.

7. In the above circumstances new connection could not be effected in favour of the Complainant at the same premises where theft of electricity was detected and found to disturb the power to adjacent outstanding premises. An intimation letter was served accordingly to the Complainant explaining him the whole matters vide letter Ref No.1501, dated: 17.01.2022.

8. Moreover, the pilferage bill amounting to Rs.37,957.00 infavour of the father of the Complainant is still outstanding to the Op. Therefore, the Complainant is not entitled to get any electricity connection in the same premises where his father is an accused for theft of electricity and the same was detected and found to disturb the power to adjacent outstanding premises.

9. Under the above circumstances, the Op has prayed for dismissal of the present case with costs.

10. Points for determination are:

1. Is the case maintainable in its present form and in law?
2. Is the Complainant entitled to the relief(s) as sought for?

11. Decision with reasons

1. Both the points I and II, being inter related to each other, are taken up together for discussion for sake of brevity and convenience.

2. We have carefully perused the Petition of the Complainant along with all connected papers and other documents.

12. Having regards had to the facts and circumstances of the case in the light of evidence, it is evident that the Complainant has deposited the required quotation money as such Complainant is a consumer having grievances against the Op, as such the case is maintainable in its present form and in law.

13. In the instant case, the Complainant submitted the copy of Quotation, Quotation Money Deposit Receipt, Order of the Hon’ble High Court Calcutta for payment of @50% Provisional Assessment Bill, Provisional Assessment Bill Deposit Receipt @50%, a Self Declaration through his Ld. Advocate and a Certificate from the Office of the Pratappur-1 Gram Panchayat in Original. The Complainant vide a Petition dated: 19.05.2022 prayed for treating the Complaint as Evident-in-Chief which is accepted accordingly.

14. On the other side, Op also submitted the copy of intimation letter dated: 14.01.2022 to the Complainant with reference to his Application No.2003782348 for not providing the Service Connection with reason in details, copy of FIR ledged against the father of the Complainant, Inspection Note on LMV Consumer in respect of his father, Seizure List, Order of Provisional Assessment, Provisional Assessment Bill, Breakup of Energy Charge and Fixed/Demand Charge, Order of the Hon’ble High Court Calcutta, Order of Final Assessment, Final Assessment Bill and Break up of Energy Charge and Fixed/Demand Charge. 

15. From the above submitted documents, some questionable facts are noticed by this Commission as follows :-

1. That according to the intimation letter dated: 14.01.2022 by the Op to the Complainant against Ref Application No. 2003782348, it was clearly mentioned, “the service connection at your premises ‘S/O DILIP VILL – BASANTABAR P.O. DHULIAPUR’ could not be provided for the following reasons. Outstanding Dues Pending to be cleared. Due to above discrepancy it may not be possible on the part of WBSEDCL to provide connection at your premises within the stipulated period as per procedures – A(2010).”

2. From the above remarks it is transpired that the Op not at all installed any electricity service connection to the Complainant’s premises, otherwise the Consumer Number should be mentioned in such intimation letter instead of Ref Application Number. Moreover, the Op clearly mentioned the reason for not providing connection to the Complainant; else it should be categorically mentioned as reconnection or re-installation. Except an Applicant & Service Provider, neither we have find any word in the record between the parties which will prove that the Complainant is an existing Consumer, nor any correspondence or documents by the Complainant for restoration of his existing electricity connection as claimed in the Paragraph No.5 of the Complaint.

3. On the other hand it is evident from the submitted Money Receipt, the Complainant’s father deposited @50% Provisional Assessment Bill on 03.02.2022 i.e. within 10 days from the date of Order of the Hon’ble High Court Calcutta which the Op not mentioned anywhere in the Written Version or otherwise. However, the Complainant can’t be held liable for the criminal activities of his father and moreover, he resides in the same premises as a separate family or mess in another accommodation from his parents and other family members as per the Certificate dated: 18.10.2022 issued by the Office of the Pratappur-1 Gram Panchayat. In the Self Declaration his through the Ld. Advocate, the Complainant admitted that being a son he resides separately but, he has no separate premises number apart from his father’s premises.

4. Now, it appears from the materials on record that the Complainant has been living separately in another accommodation which is separate from his father’s accommodation. If for the argument sake, it is accepted that the father of the Complainant is an accused in connection with the case u/s 135(1)(a) of the Electricity Act, 2003; the Complainant cannot be held liable or answerable for the acts or offence committed if any by his father. Electricity is an essential service which cannot be curtailed on any unfounded ground. As the Complainant resides and maintains his family in a separate mess exclusively from his father, he is entitled to get the Electricity Service from the Op.

5. Therefore, this Commission has not found any valid reason for not installing the new electricity connection in the house of the Complainant by the Op as an essential service.

16. Under the above facts and circumstances as mentioned above, this Commission found that there is the elements of deficiency in service by the Op.

17. Therefore, the Complainant is entitled to get the installation for New Electricity Service Connection at his premises.

18. Both the points are disposed of accordingly.

19. Thus, the complaint case succeeds.

Hence, it is

        O R D E R E D

That the CC-19 of 2022 be and the same is allowed on contest.

The Op is directed to install the New Electricity Service Connection at the premises of the Complainant within 30 Days from the date of this order, in default the Op will be liable to pay @ Rs.50.00 per diem (day) in addition to the said amount for non-compliance from the date of this order. No other relief is allowed.

The Complainant would be at liberty to put the order into execution.

Let a copy of this judgment be provided to both the parties free of cost. The judgment be uploaded forthwith on the website of the Commission for the perusal of the parties.

File be consigned to record section along with a copy of this judgment.