West Bengal

Paschim Midnapore

CC/4/2016

Smt. Kalyani Das - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Assistant Manager, W.B.S.E.D.C.L. - Opp.Party(s)

01 Jun 2016

ORDER

 

 

 

 

 

 

                                                             DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM

PASCHIM MEDINIPUR.

                             

Bibekananda Pramanik, President,

and

 Kapot Chattopadhyay, Member.

   

Complaint Case No.04/2016

                                                       

                                                     Smt Kalyani Das…………..………………..……Complainant.

Versus

 

1)The Assistant Manager, W.B.S.E.D.C.L., Midnapore CCC,

2)The Divisional Manager, W.B.S.E.D.C.L.......…..Opp. Parties.

 

              For the Complainant: Mr.  Swapan Kumar Bhattacherjee (1), Advocate.

              For the O.P.               : Mr.  Swapan Kumar Bhattacherjee (2), Advocate.

 

Decided on: - 01/06/2016

                               

ORDER

                          Bibekananda Pramanik, President – Facts of the case, in brief, is that the complainant is a bona fide consumer of electricity vide consumer I.D. no.212200941 under the opposite parties and she paid electric bills month by month to the opposite party no.1 and nothing stands due till today.  The complainant has paid all electric bills to the opposite party no.1 according to their demand.  It is alleged that the opposite party no.1 used to receive an imaginary arrear energy charge since the bill dated 30/01/2012 without providing any particular of period although there is no default on the part of the complainant.  After payment of substantial amount as energy charge to the opposite parties, the complainant came to know about that arrear energy charge on 23/09/2015 for the first time and then she met the opposite party no.1 and asked him the reason as to why    such kind of energy charge has been collected from her for a long time in spite of payment

Contd………………..P/2

 

 

 

 

( 2 )

 of all bills as per their demand but the opposite party no.1 did not give any suitable reply to the complainant.  It is stated by the complainant that the opposite party no.1 has already received a sum of Rs.26,000/- only from the complainant as arrear energy charges in a  most illegal way.  Opposite parties cannot claim any such arrear electric charges beyond the meter reading or actual consumption of unit.  Complainant met opposite party no.2 and demanded for refund of that amount, so collected as arrear energy charge but opposite party no.2 refused to refund that amount.  Hence the complaint, praying for directing the opposite parties not to claim any arrear energy charge and for refund of Rs.26,000/- which has already been received as arrear energy charge, an award of Rs.20,000/- for deficiency in service and Rs.10,000/- as litigation cost.

                  Both the opposite parties have contested this case by filling a joint written objection.

                   Denying and disputing the case of the complainant, it is the specific case of the opposite parties that the complainant paid such bill amount of electricity without any objection and she cannot now challenge regarding such payment.  It is further submitted by the opposite parties that energy charges are claimed vide guidelines of W.B.E.R.C. dated 30/12/2011, 01/12/2012, 30/04/2014 and 01/04/2015 and that has been mentioned in the energy bills.  It is stated that there is no question of deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties and therefore the petition of complaint is liable to be dismissed with cost.

 

Point for decision

                     

                                                                     Is the complainant entitled to get the reliefs, as sought for ?    

                   

Decision with reasons

                At the very outset, it is to be stated here that neither the complainant nor the opposite parties has adduced any sort of evidence, either oral or documentary but they  have relied upon some documents, so filed by them. Admittedly, the complainant is a consumer of electricity under the opposite parties and she paid electric bill regularly.  Now the dispute,  as raised by the complainant, is that the complainant for the first time came to know on 30/09/2015 that an amount towards arrear energy charge are being claimed since the bill dated 30/01/2012 and when the complainant met the opposite party no.1 and asked about the reason for such kind of arrear energy charge so collected from her for a long time but the

Contd………………..P/3

 

 

 

 

( 3 )

opposite party no.1 did not give any suitable reply to the complainant.  It appears from the electric bills, so filed by the complainant that in each and every bills there is a claim of outstanding amount of arrear energy charge.  We find from those bills that in each and every electric bills break-up of charges in terms of particular order of W.B.E.R.C. has been mentioned therein.  At the time of hearing of argument, Ld. Lawyer for the opposite parties drawn our attention to the tariff order of W.B.S.E.D.C.L. for the year 2011 to 2012 and 2012 to 2013, so filed by them.  From the said Tariff Order, we find that due to late finalization of tariff, such arrear energy charges are claimed and the manner of realization of such recovery of arrear energy charge has been clearly mentioned in point no.7.2.18 of the Tariff  Order. It appears from the said point no.7.2.18 that “Adjustments,  if any, for over recovery/under recovery for 2011 to 2012 along with the same of 2012 to 2013 from the energy recipient shall be made in 48 equal monthly installments through subsequent energy bills  and such adjustment will start from the energy bill raised on or after 1^st January 2013.  It thus appears that the opposite parties are claiming such arrear energy charges as per Tariff Order of W.B.S.E.D.C.L. for the 2011-12 and 2012-13.  So we find that in claiming such arrear energy charges,  the opposite parties did no illegality as they are claiming such charges as per Tariff Order.  It is therefore held that there is neither any illegality nor any deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party, as alleged by the complainant and as such the petition of complaint is  liable to be dismissed.

                                                                Hence, it is,

                                                              Ordered,

                                                         that the complaint case no.04/2016  is hereby dismissed on contest but in the circumstances without cost.

                                  Let plain copy of this order be given to the parties free of cost.

             Dictated and Corrected by me

                        Sd/-B. Pramanik.                Sd/- K.K.Chattopadhyay.              Sd/-B. Pramanik. 

                              President                                   Member                                   President

                                                                                                                           District Forum

                                                                                                                         Paschim Medinipur