The instant case was started on the basis of a petition of complaint filed by one Ajay Mandal @ Late Prasad Munda, of Vill. & P.O. Jitarpur P.S. Chanchal, Dist. – Malda (W.B.) u/s. 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 and the same petition was registered as Consumer Case No. 74/2016.

The fact of the case as revealed from the petition of complaint as well as from the evidence is that the father of the complainant  Late Prasad Mandal @ Late Prasad Munda, a resident of Vill. & P.O. Jitarpur P.S. Chanchal, Dist. – Malda (W.B.). was the consumer of the electric connection being Consumer ID No. 342002839. The father of the complainant died on 27/02/2004. After the demise of his father the complainant approached before the O.Ps to enter his name as consumer to earn his livelihood by running the husking mill by the use of the electricity. But the O.Ps refused to entertain his prayer and recommended him as a business partner of the mill. 

The further case of the complainant is that he is very regular in payment of the electricity bill. On the contrary, the Electricity Department is very reluctant to write down the meter reading in regular manner. As per yellow card the meter checked on 12/02/2013 where the reading shown 77098 units and after a lapse of long time i.e. on 26/08/2016 the reading was 112176. In order to suppress their deficiency The Electricity Department issued a ghostly bill in the name of the complainant i.e. the bill dt. 01/09/2016 amounting to Rs.43,894/-(Rupees Forty Three Thousand Eight Hundred Ninety Four Only). The complainant requested the O.P. Electricity Department several times to rectify the bill but the O.P. failed to rectify the bill. For this reason the complainant has come to this Forum with a prayer for compensation of Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand Only) from the O.P. 

The petition has been contested by the O.Ps by filing written version denying all the material allegations as leveled against the department contending inter alia that the instant case is not maintainable in its present form. The complaint is barred by the principle of waiver, estoppels and acquiescence.

The further defense case is that the bill dt. 01/09/2016 has been rectified by the O.P. but the complainant totally suppressed the matter of Energy Bill in his petition of complaint which has been raised against him and till 28/10/2016 the claim of the O.P.  was Rs. 86,039/-(Rupees Eighty Six Thousand Thirty Nine Only) for energy bill.    As the complainant is not paying the rectified bill and energy bill as such the instant case is liable to be dismissed.

During trial the complainant was himself examined as PW-1 and cross-examined. No other witness was examined on behalf of the complainant. On the other hand the O.P. has examined one witness viz. Arko Basak Assistant Engineer and Station Manager, Malatipur Customer Care Centre (CCC) as O.P.W.-1. No other witness was examined.

Now the point for consideration:- Whether the complainant is entitled to get any relief as prayed for ?

:DECISION WITH REASONS::

On perusal of the petition of complaint it is found that the complainant has prayed for entering his name instead of his deceased father  having Consumer ID No. 342002839 for earning his livelihood by running the husking mill.  But the O.P. refused his approach.  On Perusal of the evidence of the complainant it is found that in his cross-examination the complainant stated that reading was taken on 06/09/2019 but no bill was sent to him. He also deposed that on 05/10/2019 the Electricity Department took the meter reading and the complainant did not receive the bill.  This is the main reason on his part for not making payment of the bills amounting to Rs.1,92,549/-(Rupees One Lakh Ninety Two Thousand Five Hundred Forty Nine Only) .

On perusal of the Deposition in Chief of O.P.W.-1 it is found that the bill of the complainant  has been rectified and the bill amount has been increased from Rs. 43,894/- (Rupees Forty Three Thousand Eight Hundred Ninety Four Only) to Rs. 86,039/- (Eighty Six Thousand Thirty Nine Only) on 28/10/2016 and they also charge MVCA, FPPCA and arrear charges along with Electricity Charges. But the complainant has lastly paid electricity bill on 01/09/2016 for nine months. After that the O.P reconnected the service connection as per order of the Forum. But at the time of depositing the W/V the bill amount has  come to Rs. 1,92,549/-(One Lakh Ninety Two Thousand Five Hundred Forty Nine Only) and the petitioner received the said bill on 14/12/2019. 

So it is palpably clear that although the O.P. has rectified the bill of the complainant but in order to avoid to make payment of the bill amounting to Rs.1,92,549/- (Rupees One Lakh Ninety Two Thousand Five Hundred Forty Nine Only) the complainant totally denied that he has not received any bills for the meter reading as on 06/09/2019 and 05/10/2019. The complainant did not file any paper to show that he applied for incorporation of his name as legal heir of his departed father in the service connection. Moreover, a consumer has a liability to make payment for consumption of electricity.

Be that as it may, on perusal of the petition of complaint it is found that there is a dispute as regards to the unit of consumption of electricity. In view of the case law reported by the Hon’ble State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, West Bengal in its first appeal A907/2017(Divisional Engineer and Divisional Manager South Dinajpur V/S. Smt. Asha Das)  the Hon’ble State Commission held that when there was a dispute as regards to the electric bill the consumer will pray to the Regional Grievance Redressal Officer in accordance with the Regulation 3.5.1 of Notification No. 55/WBERC dt. 07/08/2013. According to the Regulation 3.5.1 in case there is any dispute in respect of the bill amount, the consumer may lodge a complaint with the Grievance Redressal Officer or the Central Grievance Redressal Officer of the Licensee and thereafter to the Ombudsman in appeal against the order of the Grievance Redressal Officer or the Central Grievance Redressal Officer, in accordance with the provisions of the concerned Regulations. So, in view of that case law as decided by the Hon’ble State Commission this Forum has got no jurisdiction to decide the matter in question as it relates to the dispute of the bill amount.

The Hon’ble State Commission also expressed the same view in Revision Petition No. RP 102/2018 arising out of the case of Malda District Consumer Forum.

So considering such facts and circumstances it is found that the instant case is not maintainable as such liable to be dismissed.

 C.F. paid is correct.

Hence, ordered that

the case be and the same is dismissed on contest without any cost

Let a copy of this judgment be given to the Complainant/O.P. free of cost on proper application.