The Executive Engineer, WESCO of Odisha, Sundargarh V/S Tejaraj Patel
Tejaraj Patel filed a consumer case on 25 Oct 2014 against The Executive Engineer, WESCO of Odisha, Sundargarh in the Sundargarh Consumer Court. The case no is CC/27/14 and the judgment uploaded on 27 Mar 2015.
Orissa
Sundargarh
CC/27/14
Tejaraj Patel - Complainant(s)
Versus
The Executive Engineer, WESCO of Odisha, Sundargarh - Opp.Party(s)
Self
25 Oct 2014
ORDER
DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, SUNDARGARH-1
Deficiency in service of Electricity (WESCO) department, against the opposite parties is the grievance of the complainant.
The complainant is a bona-fide resident of aforesaid addresses as in the cause title wherein opposite party No. 1 is the head of the Dist. Electricity department of WESCO, in Sundargarh District and opposite party No. 2 & 3 are Sub Divisional and junior Engineer of the WESCO, Sundargarh Division under the control of Op No.1. The opposite Party No. 4 is Electrical Inspector of the WESCO situated at Rourkela.
It is the case of the complainant that, he a consumer under the company of Ops by taking electricity connection to his residential house having consumer and account No. D17-C-28/4A & 812125140118 respective for the purpose of his domestic use. Being a consumer of WESCO the complainant has been paying the electricity average bills regularly on production of bill by the Ops without installation of any meter. Complainant demanded Op No. 3 for installation of meter so as to pay the electricity charges as per the meter reading, but the Ops remain silent. In the mean time on dated 28.09.2013 surprisingly with vigilance cell the Ops visited the house of complainant and found no meter installed but in their enquiry report given finding of remarks that, “Meter found by pass with a load of 2 KV” and charges heavy penalty in their next bill, which amounts to their negligence as a result the complainant suffered injuries and harassment. Complainant had been to the office of the Ops for rectification of the bill, illegally imposition of heavy penalty of Rs. 19,314/- but when they did not respond files this complaint petition praying for rectification of bill and claim compensation of Rs. 50,000/- towards harassment with 12% interest therein.
Opposite parties entered appearance through their learned advocates jointly by filing their written statement on behalf of all the Ops. The Ops in their written statement has submitted that, the case of the complainant against the Ops in passing final assessment order dated 25.11.2013 in terms of the section 126 of the Electricity Act, 2003 as the petitioner found to be used electricity unauthorised by tempered the meter is not maintainable and liable to be dismissed. The Ops admitting the supply of electricity connection to the house of the complainant since 20.11.2009 has further submitted that, they had installed meter bearing No. 945608 and as per the reading of meter they were issuing bill to the complainant. In the month of June 2013 the meter reader visited the house of the complainant but as the premises of the complainant was locked again in the month of August 2013 visited the house and they could not found the meter in its place as it was shifted from its place, accordingly provisional bill was served on average to the complainant. On dated 25.09.2013 the competent authority of the Ops while on periodical inspection of meter finding situation had made inspection report. Later on a provisional assessment order dt. 22.10.2013 for unauthorised use of electricity was issued to the complainant for making payment as penal bill with request to attain for hearing before the assessing officer within seven days but no objection has been filed by the complainant. Accordingly the complaint petition is liable to be rejected.
Heard, the case from the parties and perusal of complainant petition, written statement and documents available in the records as filed by the complainant it is found to be clear that, the complainant is a consumer with the Ops by supplying electricity connection to the house of complainant on receipt of the charge of electric energy as per production of bill by the ops. There is no dispute as to the matter as above between the parties, but the matter of imposition of penalty against unauthorised using of electricity by the complainant is the main points for determination of decision in the present case. In this regard we are agree that, there are numbers of decision by the different honourable State and National Commission, so also apex court of Supreme Court that, “A complaint against the assessment made by assessing officer under section 126 or against the offences committed under section 135 to 140 of the Electricity Act. 2003 is not maintainable before the Consumer Forum”. But hearing from the side of parties and on perusal of filed documents available in the records Annexure- ‘A’ (Electric bills), Annexure –‘B’ Inspection report dated 28.09.2013 and Annexure ‘C’ complaint dated 24.10.2012, we came to the points for decision that, since the time of supply electricity connection to the house of the complainant an average bill had been producing by the Ops which the complainant was repaying sincerely. It is also fact to say, on demand vide annexure ‘C’ the Ops did not installed any meter in the premises of complainant house. The Ops in their written version in Para “3(a)” has admitted as to the non available of meter in the premises of complainant prior to inspection of the house by the Vigilance Cell, but strange to say that, without proceeding against the point as above charging guilty to the complainant for tempering the meter by mentioning in remarks by the Inspecting Officer in inspection report as “Meter found bypassed with a load of 2KV” is how for admissible? Without installing meter to the premises of the complainant house, receiving payment of average bill on production of bill from the complainant, finding him guilty charging tempering or bypassed meter with imposing illegally penal bill amounts to deficiency in service by the Ops, which the Ops have to installed the meter and on verification or reading the meter, bill against complainant ought to have been recovered.
In view of our forgoing discussion, we come to the conclusion that, the complainant is entitled to the reliefs claimed from the Ops. For the reasons aforesaid and under the facts and circumstances we hold that, the complaint petition is merit consideration. Hence the Ops are directed to install the meter in the premises of complainant and recover the bill as per the reading on production of bill to the complainant instead of the penal bill of Rs. 19,314/- dt. 11.02.2014 within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order, failing which an amount Rs. 200/- as cost will be impose against them per day to till the date of obedience of order.
The order is pronounced in the open forum on this day of 25th Oct, 2014 under the signature and seal of the forum.
Accordingly the case is disposed of.
[HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE Arun Kumar patel]
PRESIDENT
[HON'BLE MS. Babita Mohapatra]
MEMBER
Consumer Court Lawyer
Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.