The Complainant has filed this case alleging deficiency-in-service by the O.Ps, where O.P No.1 is the C.E.O, NESCO, Januganj Golai, Balasore, O.P No.2 is the Electrical Sub-Divisional Officer, Jaleswar, Balasore and O.P No.3 is Sri Chandrakanta Mohanty, Junior Manager (Electrical), Jaleswar No.1 Section, Jaleswar, Balasore. 

                    2. The case of the Complainant in brief is that the Complainant is a domestic Consumer under the O.Ps bearing Consumer No.FBD-0194. The Complainant received a demand letter on 23.12.2013 bearing No.2125, dtd.03.12.2013 from O.P No.2 demanding to pay a sum of Rs.29,789/- (Rupees Twenty nine thousand seven hundred eighty nine) only for unauthorised use of electricity as detected on 18.11.2013, thus assessing provisionally the amount of Rs.29,789/- (Rupees Twenty nine thousand seven hundred eighty nine) only, which amounts to unfair trade practice by the O.Ps, whereas the Complainant has been paying the regular energy bills to the O.Ps as per their demand including last bill of 11/13 for Rs.120/- (Rupees One hundred twenty) only on 24.12.2013. Though the Complainant has filed his objection against provisional bill before the O.Ps on 26.12.2013, but he came to know that the bill has been finally assessed by the O.Ps on 17.12.2013 for Rs.29,789/- (Rupees Twenty nine thousand seven hundred eighty nine) only vide letter No.2269, causing mental torture and harassment to the Complainant. There was no occasion of unauthorised use of electricity by the Complainant on 18.11.2013, but the O.Ps as per their final assessment order demanded/ threatened to pay the said sum or else they will disconnect the power supply to the house of the Complainant. Cause of action arose on 03.12.2013, 23.12.2013 and 26.12.2013. The Complainant has prayed for waiver of illegal assessed amount along with compensation for mental agony and litigation cost. Neither the Complainant nor his Advocate was present at the time of hearing of this case.

                    3. Though sufficient opportunities were given to O.P No.1, but he neither appeared nor filed his written version in this case. The O.P No.1 is set ex-parte.

                    4. Though the O.Ps No.2 and 3 have appeared in this case, but have not filed their written version. The Advocate for O.Ps No.2 and 3 is present at the time of hearing of this case.

                    5. In order to substantiate their claim, both the Parties have filed certain documents as per list. Perused the documents filed. Neither the Complainant nor his Advocate was present at the time of hearing of this case. So, his pleading is his case. According to his pleading, he has received a demand letter on 23.12.2013 from O.P No.2 demanding to pay a sum of Rs.29,789/- (Rupees Twenty nine thousand seven hundred eighty nine) only for unauthorised use of electricity as detected on 18.11.2013, thus assessing provisionally the amount of Rs.29,789/- (Rupees Twenty nine thousand seven hundred eighty nine) only. The Complainant has been paying the regular energy bills to the O.Ps as per their demand including last bill of 11/13 for Rs.120/- (Rupees One hundred twenty) only on 24.12.2013. Though the Complainant has filed his objection against provisional bill before the O.Ps on 26.12.2013, but he came to know that the bill has been finally assessed by the O.Ps on 17.12.2013 for Rs.29,789/- (Rupees Twenty nine thousand seven hundred eighty nine) only vide letter No.2269. The O.Ps as per their final assessment order demanded/ threatened to pay the said sum or else they will disconnect the power supply to the house of the Complainant. The Complainant has filed this case praying for waiving of illegal assessed amount along with compensation and litigation cost. On the other hand, the O.P No.1 is set ex-parte as mentioned earlier. It has been argued on behalf of the O.Ps No.2 and 3 that it is a case U/s.126 of Electricity Act-2003 for unauthorized use of electricity and there is an assessment, for which this case is not maintainable before this Consumer Forum and the Complainant has neither complied the assessment order made by the O.Ps nor appealed before the appellate authority, rather filed this case in this Forum. So, when there is an assessment, this Forum has no jurisdiction to entertain the case and the Complainant is at liberty to approach the appropriate authority. However, in view of the authority reported in III (2013) CLT-55 (SC) in the case of Uttar Pradesh Power Corporation Limited & Ors. (Vrs.) Anis Ahmad, wherein it has been held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India that complaint against assessment made U/s.126 or action taken against those committing offences U/s.135 to 140 of Electricity Act, 2003, held, is not maintainable before a Consumer Forum. Civil Court’s jurisdiction to consider a suit with respect to the decision of assessing Officer U/s.126 or with respect to a decision of the appellate authority U/s.127 is barred U/s.145 of Electricity Act, 2003. Therefore, it is clear that after notice of provisional assessment to the person alleged to have indulged in unauthorized use of electricity, the final decision by an assessing officer, who is a public servant, on the assessment of ‘unauthorized use of electricity’ is a quasi-judicial decision and does not fall within the meaning of “consumer dispute” U/s. 2(1) (e) of Consumer Protection Act. Offences referred to in Sections-135 to 140 can be tried only by a Special Court constituted U/s.153 of Electricity Act, 2003, hence, also the complaint against any action taken under Sections-135 to 140 of Electricity Act, 2003 is not maintainable before Consumer Forum. By virtue of Section-3 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986 or Sections-173, 174 and 175 of Electricity Act, 2003, Consumer Forum cannot derive power to adjudicate a dispute in relation to assessment made U/s.126, or offences U/s.135 to 140 of Electricity Act, as the acts of indulging in “unauthorized use of electricity” do not fall within the meaning of “complaint” as defined U/s. 2(1) (c) of Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

                    6. So, now on careful consideration of all the materials available in the case record and on the basis of principle laid down by the above Authority as discussed earlier, this Forum come to the conclusion that this Consumer case is not maintainable in this Forum, for which the Complainant is not entitled for any relief as prayed for and accordingly, this Consumer case is liable to be dismissed. However, the Complainant is at liberty to approach the appropriate authority along with an application for condonation of delay, if desired/ required. Hence, Ordered:-  

                                                     O R D E R

                        The Consumer case is dismissed on ex-parte against O.Ps No.1 and on contest against O.Ps No.2 and 3, but in the peculiar circumstances without cost.  

                        Pronounced in the open Forum on this day i.e. the 19th day of May, 2018 given under my Signature & Seal of the Forum.