DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, KANDHAMAL, PHULBANI
C.C.NO. 39 OF 2023
Date of Filing: 13.02.2023
Date of Order: 15.05.2023
Smt.Kumudini Panda,
W/o-Late Bamadev Panda,
At/Po-Govt.College Road,Phulbani
District-Kandhamal, 762001 ………………….. Complainant.
Versus.
- The Executive Engineer Electrical,
TPSODL, Phulbani,
Dist- Kandhamal
- SDO Electrical
TPSODL, Phulbani
- Junior Engineer Electrical
-
Dist- Kandhamal
……….….. Opp. Parties.
Present: Sri Purna Chandra Mishra - President.
Sri Sudhakar Senapothi - Member.
For the Complainant: Mr. Manoranjan Mohanty Adv. & associates
For OP No. 1 : Self
For O.P. Nos 2&3 : Ex-partee
JUDGEMENT
Mr. Purna Chandra Mishra, President.
Complainant Kumudini Panda has filed this case u/s 35 of the CP Act-2019 alleging deficiency of service on the part of the Opposite Parties for providing her with an exorbitant bill of Rs. 32,082/- and not correcting it in spite of repeated approaches and praying therein for direction to the Opposite Parties to pay a sum of Rs. 50, 000/- towards harassment and a sum of Rs. 30, 000/- towards the cost of litigation.
- Brief fact leading to the case is that the complainant is a consumer of the Opposite Parties bearing consumer No. 292101080052. In the month of February-2022, the Opposite Parties provided her an erratic bill of Rs. 1,65,000/- and as she complained, the amount was revised to Rs. 32,082/-. After the revision, she had paid a sum of Rs. 2,342/- and thereafter, the outstanding amount was Rs. 20,000/-. As the complainant approached the OPs for one-time settlement, a sum of Rs. 10,416.90p was deducted from total arrear amount and after the settlement, the total due of the complainant came to Rs. 9580.45p.which she deposited on the same day. After clearing of all the dues in the evening at about 6 PM, when the complainant was inside her house, the lights of her house were cut off and when she came out, she found two staffs of the Opposite Parties disconnected the power supply by climbing on the electric pole. She immediately showed them the money receipt but without taking note of that, they disconnected power supply by telling that they have been instructed by the Opposite Parties to disconnect power supply. The complainant immediately contacted over phone and also physically approached the Opposite Parties to restore power supply but her request was not complied. As the OP disconnected power supply in spite of payment of all the dues and did not restore it, finding no other alternative, she approached this Commission for the reliefs as discussed above.
- After receipt of notice, the OP No. 1 appeared and filed written statement. Other OPs did not appear. The OP No. 1 in his written statement stated that the complainant availed the special discount scheme i.e. OTS-2022 and cleared up all her dues on 0802.2023 by paying Rs. 9, 559/- vide MR No. 32522508022320200009. The service connection of the complainant was disconnected due to arrear in the bill and she had not disclosed the same to the OTS settlement team and got the receipt. Even though the complainant had stated that her power supply was disconnected at 6 PM on 08.02.2023, the money receipt generated for Rs. 9589/- has been generated at 7.35 PM on 08.02.2023. So, the complainant has not come with clean hands to this Commission for which he prays for dismissal of the case with cost.
- We have perused the copy of the money receipt filed by the OP No. 1 which has been marked as Annexure-1. From this money receipt, it is seen that the collection date is 8th Feb. 2023 and the time is 17.35 hrs. i.e. 5.35 PM. The contention of the Opposite Party is that she has deposited the amount at 7.35 PM is completely false and the computer generated money receipt filed by the OP exposes the falsity of the OP No; 1.
- Electricity is an essential service. It is governed by a special Act i.e. Electricy Act-2003. It is mandatory for the Opposite Party to issue a clear 15 days notice to the consumer before disconnection of power supply. In the present case, Section-56 of the Electricity Act has been clearly violated. Nowhere in the written statement, the Opposite Party has stated that they had duly served the notice u/s 56 of the Electricity Act-2003 and after completion of notice period, the power supply has been disconnected. Since the OP disconnected power supply to the house of the complainant without prior notice as required under law they are liable to compensate the complainant for the loss and harassment sustained by her. The Opposite Parties have also nowhere stated that disconnection certificate was issued to the complainant to establish their claim that power supply was disconnected prior to 8th Feb. 2023. The plea taken by the Opposite Parties is only intended to escape from the clutches of law for their illegal action. As a case of deficiency in service is made out against the OPs, they are liable to compensate the complainant and hence the order.
O R D E R
The complaint petition is allowed on contest against the OP No.1 and expartee against OP NO. 2 and 3. The OPs are made jointly and severally liable for causing deficiency in rendering service to the complainant and for causing harassment lady to one senior citizen. The OPs are directed to pay Rs. 10, 000/- each for causing deficiency in service and harassment to the lady and a sum of Rs. 10000/- towards the cost of litigation. The amount will carry interest @ 12% per annum from the date of filing of the case till it is actually paid to the complainant.
Computerized & corrected by me.
I Agree
MEMBER PRESIDENT
Pronounced in the open Commission today on this 15th day of May 2023 in the presence of the parties.
MEMBER PRESIDENT
