The brief facts of the case are that the complainant who is the consumer of the OP (MeSEB, Shillong) stated that for the last 13 months i.e., w.e.f January 2008 to January 2009 the electricity bill charged from her has been manipulated and manufactured by the authorities concern. The Complainant approached the MeSEB for clarification of the same and she was told by the officials that the readings were assumed. Complainant further stated that the concern staff of the OP did not visit the house but have billed her arbitrarily but due to fear of disconnection, the complainant complied with obligation of payment. Thereafter, the complainant had brought to the notice of the OP regarding the billing without taking the meter reading but the officials of the OP informed her that the meter reading could not be taken because of the presence of dog in the compound and also the house does not have a bell at its entrance. Complainant clarified that she does not have a pet dog and also the bell is fixed at the gate of the compound. Thereafter, the complainant on not being satisfied with the steps initiated by the OP had approach the authorities of the OP on a number of occasion for regularizing the billing and also requested the OP to efficiently perform their duties. The Complainant further stated that in the bill dated 14.4.2009 an adjustment of Rs 17,759 was made which clearly indicates that the complainant had been exorbitantly billed, moreover the excess billing/charged was not indicated in detail other than the said total amount. Hence, the complaint prayed this Forum to direct the OP to regularize the billing and to pay compensation along with interest on the excessive amount received by the OP. Notice was issued to OP who also filed show cause. In their reply they stated that the bills for the last 13 months i.e., from January 2008 to January 2009 were prepared as per the consumption of electricity based on the meter reading. OP further stated that for the period when meter reading could not be taken the same was done and consumption average basis and in case of wrong billing due to any mistake, for a certain period, the same was corrected and revised accordingly. The pattern of billing for the month January 2008 to June 2008 has been done as per the meter reading and the billing for the accounting month July 2008 to February 2009 was done on average consumption basis. The total billed for the accounting month November 2008 to February 2009 was 6116 units. The actual units billed for the accounting month November 2008 to March 2009 was 4494 units. The excess billed for the accounting month November 2008 to February 2009 was 1172 units i.e., 6116 to 4944 units for which the consumer has not yet paid the bill. The reading was taken correctly from the meter on 20/03/2009. The bill for the period from November 2008 to March 2009 was then revised accordingly on 24/03/2009 which could reflect in the bill for the accounting month March 2009. The consumer has paid the bills up to the accounting month January 2009. As such, out of the total units billed from the accounting month 11 November 2008 to February 2009 of 6116 units, she has paid the bill of 4597 units relating to the accounting month November 2008 to January 2009 which is the net payable unit up to the accounting month March 2009. Then the payable electricity bill for the accounting month March 2009 is Rs 1170. On the After going through the records, and deposition made by the parties this Forum therefore observed the following 1. The OP did bill the Complainant on the average consumption for a few months. 2. The billing from January 2008 to June 2008 was on the actual meter reading and from July 2008 to February 2009 was on the average consumption which was later adjusted and revised and reading was corrected on 20.03.2009 3. In the month of April 2009 an adjustment of Rs 17, 759 was made by the OP which indicates that the earlier bills were based on average consumption and were infact exorbitant. We are of the opinion that billing on average consumption is not the correct procedure which the OP has followed though subsequently it has adjusted the excessive bill amount in the subsequent bill. We are therefore inclined to dispose off this complaint with the direction to the OP to have a re assessment of the bills during the period from January 2008 to March 2009 billed against the Complainant. This re-assessment is to be done on the basis of the average of the actual meter readings for the previous corresponding year and in the presence of the Complainant. The OP is to re adjust excessive billing, if any, to the current bill to be paid by the Complainant. The OP is directed to undertake this exercise within 30 days of the receipt of this Order. Case disposed off.