The Complainant has filed this case alleging deficiency-in-service by the O.Ps, where O.P No.1 is the Junior Engineer (Electrical), NESCO, Gopalpur Division, O.P No.2 is the S.D.O (Electrical), NESCO, Bahanaga, O.P No.3 is the Executive Engineer (Electrical), Soro Division and O.P No.4 is the Managing Director, NESCO Corporate Office, Januganj, Balasore.   

                    2. The case of the Complainant in brief is that the Complainant is a bonafide Agricultural/ PLI Consumer under the O.Ps vide Consumer No.NBD-2240042 with contract demand of 2 K.W vide agreement dtd.14.03.2013 for the purpose of irrigation and accordingly, energy charges are paid as per meter reading. The Complainant installed one 2 H.P motor of 1.5 K.W along with light, fan and T.V installed in thatched shed in the paddy field. The shed is not a residential and on the basis of agreement, where 5% extra load is permissible to be used for lighting purposes, which was used for the purpose of watch and ward to protect L.I point. But, as per verification conducted by the O.Ps on 21.02.2015, where they observed that the Consumer used load for domestic purpose, which is totally false, baseless and whimsical, rather mentioned to collect undue money from the Complainant. Thus, an amount of Rs.31,181/- (Rupees Thirty one thousand one hundred eighty one) only is reflected illegally in the bill of June, 2015 against the provision of electricity Law. The calculation of said amount has neither been specified/ narrated in the said bill nor has been communicated to the Complainant. Accordingly, the Complainant has served one letter to the O.P No.3 on 22.01.2016 requesting to intimate about the aforesaid amount of Rs.31,181/- (Rupees Thirty one thousand one hundred eighty one) only through Regd. Post with AD, but no reply has been received yet by the Complainant. The Complainant also requested the O.Ps No.1 to 3 to exempt the aforesaid illegal amount or to inform the details of calculation of such amount, but all were in vain. The O.Ps have not taken any step for correction of such bill, which amounts to deficiency-in-service by the O.Ps. Cause of action to file this case arose on 20.04.2016 while the O.Ps entering into the L.I point premises and threatened to disconnect the electric line, provided the entire electric bill including such illegal amount is cleared by the Complainant within 7 days, thus the Complainant has filed this case for necessary relief. The Complainant has prayed for correction of the bill along with compensation for mental agony and litigation cost. Neither the Complainant nor his Advocate was present at the time of hearing of this case.    

                    3. Though the O.Ps have appeared in this case through their Advocate, but they have filed their written version beyond the statutory period, for which the written version filed by the O.Ps was not accepted. The O.Ps are also set ex-parte.

                    4. In order to substantiate their claim, both the Parties have filed certain documents as per list. Perused the documents filed. Neither the the Complainant nor his Advocate was present at the time of hearing of this case. So, his pleading remains as it is and in his pleading, he has taken the plea that he has installed one 2 H.P motor of 1.5 K.W along with light, fan and T.V installed in thatched shed in the paddy field and the shed is not a residential and on the basis of agreement, 5% extra load is permissible to be used for lighting purposes. But, the O.Ps verified his premises on 21.02.2015, where they observed that the Consumer used load for domestic purpose, which is totally false, baseless and whimsical, for which an amount of Rs.31,181/- (Rupees Thirty one thousand one hundred eighty one) only is reflected illegally in the bill of June, 2015 against the provision of electricity Law. Accordingly, the Complainant has served one letter to the O.P No.3 on 22.01.2016 requesting to intimate about the aforesaid amount of Rs.31,181/- (Rupees Thirty one thousand one hundred eighty one) only, but no reply has been received yet by the Complainant. The Complainant also requested the O.Ps No.1 to 3 to exempt the aforesaid illegal amount or to inform the details of calculation of such amount, but the O.Ps have not taken any step for correction of such bill, which amounts to deficiency-in-service on the part of the O.Ps. Thus, the Complainant has filed this case praying for correction of the bill along with compensation and litigation cost. On the other hand, the O.Ps are set ex-parte as mentioned earlier, but the Advocate for O.Ps has participated in hearing and it has been argued on behalf of the O.Ps that it is a case U/s.126 of Electricity Act-2003 for unauthorized use of electricity and there is an assessment, for which this case is not maintainable before this Consumer Forum and the Complainant has neither complied the assessment order made by the O.Ps nor appealed before the appellate authority, rather filed this case in this Forum. So, when there is an assessment, this Forum has no jurisdiction to entertain the case and the Complainant is at liberty to approach the appropriate authority. However, in view of the authority reported in III (2013) CLT-55 (SC) in the case of Uttar Pradesh Power Corporation Limited & Ors. (Vrs.) Anis Ahmad, wherein 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.

                    5. 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 ex-parte against the O.Ps, but in the peculiar circumstances without cost.  

                         Pronounced in the open Forum on this day i.e. the 11th day of April, 2019 given under my Signature & Seal of the Forum.