Tamil Nadu

Nagapattinam

CC/20/2014

V.Palanivelu - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Joiner Engineer, TNEB and Two others. - Opp.Party(s)

In Person

31 Dec 2014

ORDER

  Date of Filing      : 15.04.2014

                                                                                         Date of Disposal: 31.12.2014

           

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,

NAGAPATTINAM

 

PRESENT: THIRU.P.G.RAJAGOPAL, B.A.B.L.,         …..PRESIDENT

    THIRU.A.BASHEER AHAMED,B.Com., …. MEMBER I

                   Tmt. R.GEETHA, B.A.,                             …. MEMBER II

 

CC. No.20/2014

 

DECIDED ON THIS 31^st  DAY OF DECEMBER 2014.

 

V. Palanivelu

S/o Vadivelu

Inspector of Local Fund Audit (Retd.)

48, Thirumanjana Veethi,

Mayiladuthurai – 609 001,

Nagapattinam District.                                                                     … Complainant

                                                                                      

                                                                /versus/

 

1. The Junior Engineer,

     Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corp. Ltd.,

      Mayiladuthurai Town (West), Mayiladuthurai.

2. Assistant Divisional Engineer,

     Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corp. Ltd.,

      Mayiladuthurai Town, Mayiladuthurai.

3. The Superintending Engineer,

     Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corp. Ltd.,

      Nagapattinam                                                                             … Opposite parties

 

           

 

            This complaint having come up for final hearing before us on 22.12.2014 on perusal of the material records and on hearing the arguments of Thiru.T.Vairavanathan, Counsel for the complainant, Thiru.S.Vinayak, counsel for the opposite parties and having stood for consideration, till this day the Forum passed the following

 

 

ORDER.

     By the President, Thiru.P.G.Rajagopal, B.A.B.L., 

          This complaint is filed by the complainant u/s 12 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986. 

        2. The gist of the complaint filed by the complainant is that the complainant having the domestic electrical service connection no.521-014-87, when sent the current consumption charges of Rs.2,530/- through his assistant to the office of the 1^st opposite party on 06.03.2014, they have refused to receive the amount stating that a sum of Rs.12,499/- has to be paid by the complainant and subsequently when the complainant himself went to the office on 23.03.2014, the officials writing the figure  Rs.12,499/- in the current consumption card refused to receive the sum of Rs.2,530/- stating that the entire amount has to be paid.  The complainant sent a complaint to the 2^nd and 3^rd opposite parties in that regard. On 29.03.2014 a Lineman came to his house and informed him that the 2^nd opposite party has ordered to disconnect his electrical service connection. When the complainant asked for the order the said lineman, contacted the 2^nd opposite party over his mobile phone and then returned back without giving any intimation to the complainant. When the complainant again went to the office on 02.04.2014 they mentioned in the current consumption Card that the sum of Rs.15,108/- is to be paid. When the complainant asked for the particulars of the said amount they could not give any details.  As the meter of the complainant’s service connection had become defective, it was removed by the Board and during the period till the meter was fixed, the current consumption charges were sought to be collected at the average of 560 units bi-monthly.  According to the entries made in the current consumption card the meter was not used during the period 07.05.2012 to 04.09.2012. In the Citizen Charter under clause 5.7, it is mentioned that when a complaint was received about the defective meter it should be replaced within 30 days after collecting the charges applicable.  But in the complainant’s service connection meter has been replaced after more than 3 months.

         3. The current consumption charges noted as 1490 units, which is unbelievably exorbitant. Having failed to replace the meter within the prescribed period and without disclosing the particulars of the amount of Rs.12,499/- sought to be collected from the complainant, the opposite parties have arbitrarily  fixed the current consumption units and the relative charges which is sheer deficiency of service on the part of the opposite parties.  Even the refusal to receive the sum of Rs.2,530/- sought to be paid by the complainant on 6.03.2014 and 02.04.2014 is also sheer deficiency of service on their part. The complainant had to send the current consumption charges of Rs.2,530/- by way of Demand Draft drawn on the Indian Bank, Kornadu Branch.  The complainant prays for an order to direct the opposite parties to reconnect the service connection if disconnection was effected and to take  departmental action against the 2^nd and 3^rd opposite parties for not replacing the meter within the prescribed time, to pay the sum of Rs.50,000/- towards compensation for the mental agony, inconvenience and expenditure caused to the complainant owing to the deficiency of service on the part of the opposite parties, to pay the litigation expenses and to grant such and other reliefs as this Forum would may deem fit.

                        4. The gist of the written version filed by the 1^st opposite party and adopted by the 2^nd and 3^rd opposite parties is that, the complainant had stored the wood to be used for furniture in a  godown at the house adjoining the complainant’s residential house and as that place was used for the commercial purpose and current consumption was taken from the complainant’s domestic service connection, the Anti Power Theft Squad on inspection found out to be unauthorized consumption of electricity and hence they attempted to proceed against the complainant for using the electricity from his domestic service connection to the premises used as the godown without changing the current consumption tariff. But subsequently the said proceedings were cancelled against the complainant. Therefore there is no deficiency of service on the part of the opposite parties and the complaint is liable to be dismissed.

                        5. The complainant has filed his proof affidavit reiterating all the averments made in the complaint and has filed 9 documents which are marked as Exhibits A1 to A9 and the 1^st opposite party filed his proof affidavit and has filed 5 documents which are marked as Exhibits B1 to B5. Written arguments have been submitted by both the sides.

6. Points for consideration:-

1. Whether there is deficiency of service on the part of the opposite parties?

                       2. Whether the complainant is entitled to any relief? If so to what relief?

 

                        7. The complainant’s allegation is that the opposite parties have arbitrarily and exorbitantly assessed the current consumption charges of his domestic service connection No. 521-014-87 and refused to receive the current consumption charges of Rs.2,530/- attempted to be paid on 06.03.2014 and 02.04.2014.  The officials refused to receive the amount and insisted to make payment of Rs.15,108/- including of the said consumption charges of Rs.2,530/-. In the current consumption card, the amount Rs.12,499/- is noted under the head ‘slip’ and when the complainant asked for the details of the amount, the officials could not give any details in that regard. Their failure to replace the meter in his service connection within 30 days from the date of  the removal of the defective meter, their arbitrary assessment of Rs.1490/- on 06.07.2013 is sheer deficiency of service on their part.  The complainant has stated in his complaint that the 1^st opposite party demanded the payment of Rs.50,000/- for the alleged unauthorized use of electricity to the premises where the wood were stored on the ground that the Anti Power Theft Squad has found out the unauthorized usage and sought to proceed against him and they subsequently dropped the proceedings when he wrote a complaint to the Vigilance and Anticorruption Department.  Only as a motive the officials charged arbitrary and exorbitant consumption of charges to wreak vengeance against the complainant. But the 1^st opposite party has in his written version all along made the averments with respect to the alleged unauthorized usage of electricity by the complainant and the subsequent dropping of further proceedings by them.  No explanation or defence is given by the 1^st opposite party with respect to the allegation of exorbitant and arbitrary assessment of current consumption charges.  But the main allegation of the complainant, that the defective meter was not replaced by the right one within 30 days as per the prescribed time in the Citizens Charter is not at all met with by the opposite parties.

                        8. On the side of the complainant, the complaint sent to the Deputy Superintendent of the Police, Vigilance and Anticorruption, Nagapattinam making allegations against the Electricity Board officials is filed as Exhibit A1, Exhibit A2, is the letter sent by the complainant to the 2^nd opposite party stating that he had not pressed the said complaint given to the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Exhibit A3 is the current consumption card, in which the amount Rs.12,499/- is charged under the head slip, Exhibit A4, is the petition sent by the complainant to the 3^rd opposite party, complaining of the arbitrary and exorbitant  charging of current consumption charges of Rs.12,499/- by the 1^st opposite party, Exhibit A5, is the accounts summary relating to the consumption charges during the period when meter was not replaced,  Exhibit A6, is the extract from the Citizens Charter maintained by the TANGEDCO, Chennai- 2, Exhibit A7, is the notice sent by the complainant to the 1^st opposite party calling upon him to receive the demand draft drawn on the Indian Bank, Mayiladuthurai, towards current consumption charges of Rs.2490/- and requesting him not to disconnect the service connection, Exhibit A8 is the letter sent by the 1^st opposite party to the complainant, annexing the receipt for the said payment of the current consumption charges of Rs.2530/- and also informing him that the said arrears of Rs.12,499/- had been cancelled by the Officials, Exhibit A9, is the complaint sent by the complainant to the 1^st opposite party as against the recovery the exorbitant charges of current consumption and requesting for replacement of the meter.

                        9. On the side of the opposite parties the observation magazars of various persons relating to various service connections adopted by the Anti Power Theft Squad on 08.02.2012 are filed as Exhibit B1 series, Exhibit B2, is the letter sent by the Assistant Account Officer, Revenue Branch, Mayiladuthurai to the 1^st opposite party to recover the current consumption charges assessed on the basis of average calculation of current consumption, during which period  the meter was removed, Exhibit B3, is the Consumer copy of ledger showing the current consumption charges of the complainant during the period when the meter was removed, Exhibit B4, is the letter sent by the 1^st opposite party to the complainant informing him that the Notional Assessment of Rs.12,499/- charged towards current consumption charges has been cancelled, Exhibit B5, is the receipt for payment of the current consumption charges of Rs.2530/- sent by the complainant by way of demand draft.

                        10. In this case the opposite parties have not replaced the defective meter within the prescribed time of 30 days as per the rule prescribed in the Citizens Charter. They have taken above 3 months for the replacement of the meter.  The delay in the replacement of the meter caused the Notional assessment by them on the basis of average consumption by the complainant, taking in to account certain period prior and after the removal of the defective meter.  The assessment for a long period alone has caused the variations in the consumption. The very charge of Rs.1460/-   goes to show that the assessment is very exorbitant.  Had they replaced the meter in time or atleast without such inordinate delay, this sort of contingency could not have arisen.  Subsequently when the complainant approached the office for making of payment of current consumption charges of Rs.2530/- due for the month of March, there is no justification to refuse the receipt of the amount.  Even assuming that there is arrears of Rs.12,499/- towards current consumption at Notional Assessment basis, the consumption charges for the current month when sought to be paid by the complainant ought to have been received by the officials.  They are not entitled to insist that the complainant has to pay the said current consumption charges for the current month along with the past arrears on the basis of Notional Assessment. 

                        11. It is pertinent to note that when the complainant had sent the said consumption charges of Rs.2530/- by way of demand draft drawn on Indian Bank, it is received by the 1^st opposite party and receipt is also given therefor.  Further when the complainant asked for the particulars of the Notional Assessment amount of Rs.12,499/- the Board is bound to give the particulars to the consumer, who has got every right to note the details of amount to be paid by him.  The officials had not done that. Even this Forum could not understand, how that sum of Rs.12,499/- was worked out and only after asking by way of clarification on 22.12.2014, the 1^st opposite party along with the official of the Account Department appeared before this Forum and explained the quantum arrived.  It is really surprising that the said payment of Rs.12,499/- has been cancelled by the accounts section as intimated by the 1^st opposite party to the complainant under Exhibit B4. While they have admitted such substantial amount of Rs.12,499/- towards charges of current consumption by way of Notional Assessment, how  they  have  got  it   cancelled  is a  mystery.  This  Forum  points  out  that  had  the intimation Exhibit B4, been sent to the complainant well in advance, that is immediately after the notice sent by him on 07.04.2014, the complainant could not have even filed this complaint and the opposite parties could not have spent their official time to resists this complaint. 

12. It is pertinent to note that the complainant sent the notice Exhibit A7, on 07.04.2014 and has filed this complaint on 15.04.2014 under the apprehension that the opposite parties would disconnect his electrical service connection.  The notice of this complaint sent by this Forum is received by the 1^st opposite party on 19.04.2014 and only subsequently, he has chosen to send the Exhibit B4 to the complainant on 26.04.2014.  Therefore the conduct of the opposite parties in not replacing the defective meter within the reasonable time atleast, the exorbitant and arbitrary assessment of current consumption charges during the period when the meter was not fixed, the refusal to receive the current consumption charges due for the month March 2014 and the failure to send the reply to the complainant in time all would go to establish the deficiency of service on the part of the opposite parties.

                        13. Point 2: In the result, the complaint is partly allowed.  Even though there was deficiency of service on the part of the opposite parties, the fact remains that the assessment of the current consumption charges of Rs.12,499/- has been cancelled by the opposite parties under the Exhibit B4 and the electrical service connection of the complainant was not disconnected.  In such circumstances, the 1^st opposite party is directed to pay the sum of Rs.5,000/-(Rupees five thousand only) to the complainant, towards his litigation expenses only.

This order is dictated by me to the Steno-Typist, transcribed and typed by him, corrected and pronounced by me on this  31^st   day of  December 2014.

 

 

MEMBER I                                    MEMBER II                                        PRESIDENT

List of documents filed by the complainant

 

Ex/A1.Dt.15.02.2012: The complaint given by the complainant to the Deputy

   Superintendent of Police & Vigilance and Anticorruption Dept., 

   against the E.B. Officials.

Ex/A2.Dt.22.05.2012: Copy of the letter sent by the complainant to the 2^nd opposite

   Party.

Ex/A3.Dt.                   : The Xerox copy of the Current Consumtion Charges Card of the

    complainant.

Ex/A4.Dt.22.03.2014: The petition sent by the complainant to the 3^rd opposite party with

   postal receipts.

Ex/A5.Dt.22.03.2014: The print out of the accounts summary of  the monthly current

    consumption charges of the complainant’s service connection

    taken on Online.  

  

Ex/A6.Dt.                   :  The Citizens Charter maintained by the TANGEDCO, Chennai- 2

 

 Ex/A7.Dt.07.04.2014: The copy of the notice sent by the complainant to the 1^st opposite

    party with  postal receipt.

Ex/A8.Dt.26.04.2014: The Xerox copy of the letter sent by the 1^st opposite party to the

    complainant, with receipt for the current consumption charges of

     Rs.2530/-

 Ex/A9.Dt.19.05.2014: The Xerox copy of the complaint sent by the complainant to the

      1^st opposite party

 

List  of document filed by the 1^st opposite party

 

Ex.B1/Dt. 08.02.2012: The Xerox copies of the observation magazars of various

    persons relating to various service connections.

Ex.B2/Dt. 26.12.2013: The Xerox copy of the the letter sent by the Assistant Account

     Officer, (Revenue) Mayiladuthurai to the 1^st opposite party

Ex.B3/Dt.10.06.2014: The Xerox copy of the Consumer Ledger showing the

   current  consumption charges of the complainant.               

Ex.B4/Dt.26.04.2014 : The Xerox copy the  letter sent by the 1^st opposite party to the

     complainant.

 Ex.B5/Dt.17.04.2014: The Xerox copy of the the receipt for payment of the current

     consumption charge of Rs.2530/- by the complainant.

 

 

 

MEMBER I                                    MEMBER II                                        PRESIDENT

 

 

 

 

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES

REDRESSAL FORUM,

NAGAPATTINAM.

 

CC.No.20/ 2014

Order Dt.:31.12.2014.