The Complainant has filed this case alleging deficiency-in-service by the O.Ps, where O.P No.1 is the J.E, Electrical (NESCO), Basta, Balasore and O.P No.2 is the S.D.O, Electrical, NESCO, Basta, Balasore
2. The case of the Complainant in brief is that the Complainant is a bonafide domestic Consumer under the O.Ps vide Consumer No.IAD-1028 and paying the energy bill regularly. The Complainant applied to O.P No.1 to replace the old meter with a new digital meter on 15.12.2014, but on 17.12.2014, the O.Ps in absence of the Complainant had broken the meter seal and verified the same. The O.Ps neither sealed the old meter nor installed the new meter rather informed to install a new one on availability. On 22.12.2014, the Complainant personally approached to install a new meter, where the O.Ps assured to comply shortly, but the O.Ps served a bill of Rs.11,612/- (Rupees Eleven thousand six hundred twelve) only to the Complainant on 19.02.2015 imposing illegally of Rs.11,538/- (Rupees Eleven thousand five hundred thirty eight) only when the meter was without any fault. Thus, the Complainant personally approached the O.Ps to revise the bill, but the O.Ps did not pay any heed to it, rather threatened to disconnect power supply from his house, as such constrained to file this case. The O.Ps without any fault of the meter, imposed said amount illegally without any prior notice or given any opportunity of being heard to the Complainant. Such type of activities made by the O.Ps has put the Complainant into mental agony and harassment. Cause of action arose on 19.02.2015 and on 23.02.2015. The Complainant has prayed for revision of energy bills along with compensation.
3. Written version filed by the O.Ps through their Advocate denying on the point of maintainability as well as its cause of action. The O.Ps have further submitted that a spot verification was made on 16.12.2014 detecting, the Complainant was availing power supply unauthorisedly with a tampered meter and refused to sign in spot verification report copy. Thereafter, provisional assessment U/s.126 (2) of Electricity Act, 2003 has been prepared for unauthorized consumption for an amount of Rs.12,735/- (Rupees Twelve thousand seven hundred thirty five) only and served to the Complainant vide letter No.2374, dtd.24.12.2014 informing to file objection if any against this provisional assessment before the O.Ps. But, the Complainant did not file any objection nor attended hearing within scheduled date, as such final assessment U/s.126 (3) was prepared and served to the Complainant for an amount of Rs.11,535/- (Rupees Eleven thousand five hundred thirty five) only vide T.O letter No.167, dtd.22.01.2015 asking to clear up the penal bill within 30 days from receipt of said letter, but the Complainant without clearing up the penal amount, has filed this case. Moreover, a “Complaint” against the assessment made by the Assessing Officer U/s.126 or against offences committed U/s.135 to 140 of the Electricity Act, 2003 is not maintainable before a Consumer Forum.
4. In view of the above averments of both the Parties, the points for determination of this case are as follows:-
(i) Whether this Consumer case is maintainable as per Law ?
(ii) Whether there is any cause of action to file this case ?
(iii) To what relief the Complainant is entitled for ?
5. In order to substantiate their claim, both the Parties have filed certain documents as per list. Perused the documents filed. It has been argued on behalf of the Complainant that when the meter supplied to him was without any fault, the spot verification and assessment order against him is not good at all and it is based on malafide intention of the O.Ps. However, when he approached the O.Ps for installation of new meter, without installing a new meter, the O.Ps served illegal assessment order to the Complainant, which shows the arbitrary activities of the O.Ps. So, the Complainant has filed this case for correction of energy bills along with compensation. On the other hand, it has been argued on behalf of the O.Ps that after spot verification, where it was noticed that the Complainant was availing power supply unauthorisedly with a tampered meter, spot verification report was prepared and the Complainant refused to sign in it. Thereafter, basing on the necessary formalities of Law, the provisional assessment U/s.126 (2) of Electricity Act, 2003 was prepared for unauthorized consumption of Electricity for an amount of Rs.12,735/- (Rupees Twelve thousand seven hundred thirty five) only, which was served to the Complainant vide letter No.2374, dtd.24.12.2014 and then final assessment U/s.126 (3) was prepared for an amount of Rs.11,535/- (Rupees Eleven thousand five hundred thirty five) only, which was also served to the Complainant vide letter No.167, dtd.22.01.2015. Perused the documents like spot verification report, provisional assessment order and final assessment order, which are available in the case record vide Annexure-A, Annexure-B and Annexure-C respectively. So, it is a clear case of U/s.126 of Electricity Act, 2003. Moreover, a “complaint” against the assessment made by Assessing Officer U/s.126 or against offences committed U/s.135 to 140 of the Electricity Act, 2003 is not maintainable before a Consumer Forum. So, when there is an assessment, this Court has no jurisdiction to entertain the case and the Complainant is at liberty to approach the appropriate authority. In view of authority reported in III (2013) CLT-55 (SC) in the case of Uttar Pradesh Power Corporation Limited & Ors. (Vrs.) Anis Ahmad, where in 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 contest against the O.Ps, but in the peculiar circumstances without any cost.
Pronounced in the open Forum on this day i.e. the 12th day of December, 2017 given under my Signature & Seal of the Forum.
