Passed  by  Shri Atul D. Alsi,  Hon’ble President.

1. The complainant  filed complaint case against O.P. for cancellation of supplementary commercial bill and issuance of residential bill by setting aside spot inspection report dated 13.12.2014 and disbursement and non disbursements new service connection for resident and there by claiming compensation of RS. 1000000/- along with interest
2.  

The complainant is having electric connection from ops bearing Consumer No. 410011078871 having residential use for his reasidence but O.P.No.2Spanko Discom Ltd., (SNDL) has falsely stated that the complainant is using the electric for residential and commercial purpose therefore supplementary commercial bill dated 5.1.2015 came to be issued. Changing the tariff from residential to commercial for service provider which is inconsistence with the rules of Electric Act 2003, for the use of electricity for the existence three commercial shops in the residential premises of complainant. The complainant has not filed the present complaint against the assessment of bill u/s 126 of Electric act 2003 therefore the Commission has jurisdiction to entertain the complaint. As per Maharashtra regulation Commission order for tariff deterrmistion on mix loadthe consumer whois having meter for residential as well as Commercial and the consumer is running own shop for his own livelihood and consumer consuming the electricity for that300 units per month then in such cases the commercial tariffrate is applicable.As per spot inspection report dated 13.12.2014 the name and user of three commercial shops and residence is the complainant and therefore as per spot inspection report the ops have converted residential meter into commercial and started issuing commercial bill form December 2014the commercial bill is false because the unit consumed are for residential purpose .In case of tenants AND shop owners the O.P.NO.2has to install seperate commcerical meter for supplying electricty for shop based on licence issued under maharastre shop act. Therefore question of using commercial electricty withiut mentioning the name and signature of tenant or shop owner thus amount to unfair trade practices. The complainant applied for separate meter for residential purpose of his son at first floor but the ops have denied the new service connection vide letter date 22.6.2015.The complainant is residing on ground floor and using electricity for residential purpose.The complainant retired government servant and he has never deed any business therefore the spot inspection report mentioning that there were three commercial shop at ground floor and issuance of bill for commercial purpose for unauthorised use of electricity is unfair trade practise on the part of op's. The Consumer has not made any commercial rent agreement or permitted to do commercial business at residential premises.The ops has obtained signatures on plaint per and prepare false inspection report on 13.12.2014. The O.P.NO.2has prepared false inspection report without spot inspection and illegally refused the new residential election connection for the arrears of bill.The complainant meter is perfect and the residential bill is being paid regularly till April 2015 the supplementary bill dated 5.1.2015 issued by opNo.1 is arbitrary.Which checking the previous bill the consumer came to know he is paying commercial bill for December- 2014. Therefore application was given for correction and issued resident bill.The O.P. has fail to enclosed valid legal documents collected at the time spot inspection in respect of existence and using of shop and supply residential electricity to commercial shop. Therefore it is the complaint prayed for setting aside the spot inspection report dated 13.12.2015 which is falsely prepared and issuance of residential bill with effect from 13.1.2014 and claiming compensation for denial of new service connection for the residential first floor along with cancellation of supplementary bill of Rs.47,900/- alongwith Compensation of Rs.1,00,000/-

2. The O.P.No.2   filed reply and denied allegation and stated and submitted that a per spot inspection report dated 13.12.2014 the part of the  premised is used for commercial purpose hence commercial bill 5.1.2015 has been drawn in accordance with law and rules and regulations. The complainant in fact challenged the assessment of bill made u/ser 126 of electricity Act on account of unauthorised use of electricity as per inspection report, therefore the complainant has to invoke the provision of Electricity Act 2003 and not remedy under Consumer Protection Act 2019. The service connection to the son of complainant haven been lawful refused on the ground that unauthorised use of electricity has been detected and the supplementary commercial bill dated 5.1.2015 is outstanding. The O.P.No.2   has carried the spot inspection in lawful manner in the presence of complainant.  In spot inspection it has been revealed that the complaint unauthorisly shifted commercial load on the meter connection for residential purposed, therefore the complainant has been charged u/s 126 of Electricity Act though he out book u/s 135 of Electricity Act for the offence of theft of electricity, however he has asking discharged civil liability by accepting the liability he has not been prosecuted u/s 135 of Electricity Act.   The consumer commission is not appellate authority u/s 135 and 136 of Electricity Act.  The O.P. has carried the spot inspection and prepared the spot panchanama as per relevant document in good faith which true and correct and cannot be challenged for frivolous grounds raised by complainant. The complaint is bound to made the payment of Electricity charges existing till the day as the assessment has attended the finality, therefore the complainant is not entitled to any relief as claim in complaint.  Therefore the complaint is deserves to be dismissed with cost.
3. The complainant argued that, the O.P. has suppressed the fact that complainant son was using residential electricity at first floor in spot inspection report and suppress the fact the complaint is using residential electricity at ground floor. The O.P.No.2  has taken the signature of complainant on blank proforma on inspection report and fails to submit the copy of inspection report on the spot to the complainant therefore the complaint issued letter on dated 31.12.2014 regarding rejection of sport inspection report. The O.P.No.2  has fail to supply the detail of three different persons using shop premised or tenant after repeated letters to op o.no.1. The consumer court has power to deal with assessment of bill prepared u/s 126 of Electricity Act.  The O.P.No.2  fail to submit the photo indicating the complainant was running three shops or witnesses of neighbour or shop registration certificate therefore the spot inspection report prepared by O.P.No.2  dated 13.12.2014 is false.  The O.P.No.1  SNDL is a franchise of O.P.No.2   therefore the tariff of O.P.No.2  MSEDCL residential is applicable.  The spot inspection report prepared by O.P.No.2  false and denial of separate connection to the son of complainant with no objection of complainant does amount to unfair trade practice. The Conversion of residential tariff to commercial tariff on the basis of spot inspection does amount to deficiency of service and therefore complainant entitled to the relief as prayed in the complaint.
4. The counsel for O.P.No.2  argued that, the bill for commercial tariff has been issued as per spot inspection suddenly on the premises of complainant on 14.12.2014 and accordingly as per the assessment u/s 126 of Electricity Act the bill has been prepared for the consumption of electricity for commercial purposed for three shops running for photo studio, Bharat Steel shop, and Xerox shop.  The consumer has used the residential connection unauthorised for the shop which comes under commercial traiff. but the bills were received by the consumer under residential tariff the inspection was carried in presence of consumer which signature and the notice u/s 56 of Electricity Act, came to be issued for supplementary  bill of Rs.47,893/-.
5. The complainant has challenged the assessment of bill before Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, vides case no. 180/2016 but the case came to be dismissed and for the similar grievance complaint has filed the present complaint before Commission. The complainant has remedy to filed appeal u/s.125 of Electricity Act, 2003 before the appellate authority for his grievance.  The complainant preferred appeal u/s 27 of Electricity Act before appealing authority and appealing authority dismiss the appeal. The Consumer Commissions is not appellate authority u/s.127 of Electricity Act.   The complainant approaching before Commission for similar relief for his redressal, therefore it is a bar of jurisdiction.  As per judgement passed by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matter of U.P.POWER Corporation Vs.  Anis Ahmed, the consumer forum has no jurisdiction to entertain the controversy in respect of assessment of bill u/s 126 of Electricity Act.  The O.P. has issued the bill as per sport inspection report and the complaint accepted the civil liability hence the complainant has not been prosecuted under and Electricity Act,2003, The Complainant in arrears of bill therefore as per  Electricity Act new Electricity Connection has been denied. The charges levelled by the complainant for the inspection report new service connection and in respect of supply  electricity bill are false without any substance of proof of evidence therefore the present complaint is deserve to be dismissed with cost.

R E A S O N I N G

6. The O.P.No.2  had visited for the spot inspection of complainant Electric connection without notice and carried out the spot panchanama in presence of complainant as per presence of signature of complainant on spot panchanama.  After inspection of spot panchanama and verification it is found that the complainant is using residence electric connection for three commercial shops at ground floor, the O.P.No.2  issued the assessment of bill as per commercial tariff amounted to Rs.47,893/- as per inspection conducted on 13=12=2014 as per report from the officer of O.P. the complainant has unauthorisly shifted the commercial load on the residential meter connection therefore complainant has been charged u/s.126 of Electricity Act. The complaint by accepting the liability he has not been prosecuted u/s 135 of Electricity Act.    The O.P. has carried out the spot panchanama as per procedure and as per law the complaint failed to prove that appropriate evidence for spot panchanama has not been carried by O.P.as per procedure established by law.  The non compliance of payment of assessment of bill the notice for disconnection has been issued to the complainant.  The complaint is arrears of bills towards commercial tariff therefore as per procedure of law the O.P.No.2  denied the new Electric Connection on first floor is not unfair trade practises. The Complainant has challenged the assessment of bill before the grievance authority and appellate authority of electricity distribution company as per Electricity Act but the appeals came to be dismissed therefore the assessment of bill issued u/s 126 of Electricity Act to the complainant is a finality of order.  In the present complaint after conducting raid the O.P. prepared spot panchanama and issued bills for the used for Electricity for commercial purpose by giving opportunity to pay the bills accordingly does not amount to deficiency of service on the part of O.P’s.  Therefore the compliant has no merits and it deserve to be dismissed as per following order.

ORDER

1. Complaint is dismiss. 
2. No order as to costs.
3.  Copy of order be furnished to both parties, free of cost.