The Complainant has filed this case alleging deficiency-in-service by the O.Ps, where O.P No.1 is the Junior Engineer, Gopalpur Electrical Division, Gopalpur, O.P No.2 is the Sub-Divisional Officer, Bahanaga Electrical Division, Bahanaga, O.P No.3 is the Executive Engineer, Electrical Division, Soro and O.P No.4 is the Managing Director, NESCO Electrical Division, Remuna, 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.NB-16678 and paying the electric bills regularly to the O.Ps as per consumption. But, the O.Ps charged Rs.14,280/- (Rupees Fourteen thousand two hundred eighty) only whimsically in the year 2014 to the Complainant, out of which the Complainant paid Rs.2,000/- (Rupees Two thousand) only on 28.02.2014 and Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five thousand) only on 28.03.2014, but the O.Ps did not deduct any amount from the said bill. Further, the O.Ps illegally charged Rs.48,560/- (Rupees Forty eight thousand five hundred sixty) only on 20.10.2014 against the Complainant on the plea that he had unauthorisedly used the electric power for a period of 12 months. Thus, the O.Ps again illegally charged Rs.69,445/- (Rupees Sixty nine thousand four hundred forty five) only on 21.07.2016 followed by a disconnection notice to the Complainant threatening to disconnect the power supply within 15 days. Accordingly, the Complainant approached the O.Ps in several occasions to correct the bill, but the O.Ps denied on 28.07.2016 to correct the same, thus the Complainant filed this case. The Complainant served Advocate notice to the O.Ps on 20.12.2014 to correct and exempt the penal bill imposed upon him, but the O.Ps did not pay any heed to it. Cause of action arose on 28.07.2016. The Complainant has prayed for exemption of illegal dues imposed upon him along with compensation for mental agony and litigation cost.
3. Written version filed by the O.Ps No.1 to 3 through their Advocate denying on the point of maintainability, jurisdiction as well as its cause of action. The O.Ps No.1 to 3 have further submitted that the Complainant had availed O.T.S in May-2012 availing a rebate of Rs.4,725/- (Rupees Four thousand seven hundred twenty five) only on payment of Rs.11,580/- (Rupees Eleven thousand five hundred eighty) only clearing outstanding dues up to September-2011. Thereafter, the Complainant has paid Rs.7,630/- (Rupees Seven thousand six hundred thirty) only from October-2011 to May-2016, hence is not a bonafide Consumer. The O.P No.2 along with other staff verified the premises of the Complainant along with the energy meter and connected load on 20.10.2014, thus detected that the Complainant was availing power supply 2.761 K.W against C.D 1 K.W unauthorisedly, where meter is found defective. Spot verification was made in presence of the Complainant and provisional assessment was made vide Order No.1843, dtd.22.10.2014 for Rs.48,559.48 ps. (Rupees Forty eight thousand five hundred fifty nine and forty eight paisa) only. Both spot verification report and provisional assessment order was sent to the Complainant giving opportunity to file objection within 7 days, but he remained silent. As per Electricity Act, 2003, final assessment order was prepared vide Order No.2264, dtd.31.12.2014 for Rs.21,000/- (Rupees Twenty one thousand) only with a liberty to pay the same within 30 days of receipt of this order and the same was sent to the Complainant. Thus, outstanding electricity bill as against the Complainant is Rs.71,748.46 ps. (Rupees Seventy one thousand seven hundred forty eight and forty six paisa) only.
4. Though sufficient opportunities are given to the O.P No.4, but he has not appeared in this case. So, the O.P No.4 is set ex-parte.
5. 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 ?
6. In order to substantiate their claim, both the Parties have filed certain documents as per list. Perused the documents filed. Neither the Complainant nor his Advocate was present at the time of hearing of this case. So, his pleading is his case. According to his pleading, the O.Ps have illegally charged Rs.14,280/- (Rupees Fourteen thousand two hundred eighty) only against him and further, the O.Ps have also illegally charged Rs.48,560/- (Rupees Forty eight thousand five hundred sixty) only against him on the plea that he had unauthorisedly used the electric power for a period of 12 months. Thereafter, the O.Ps again illegally charged Rs.69,445/- (Rupees Sixty nine thousand four hundred forty five) only on 21.07.2016 followed by a disconnection notice to the Complainant threatening to disconnect the power supply within 15 days. After several approaches made by the Complainant when no fruitful purpose arose, the Complainant has approached this Forum praying for exemption of illegal dues imposed upon him along with compensation and litigation cost. On the other hand, it has been argued on behalf of the O.Ps No.1 to 3 that when their staff verified the premises of the Complainant along with the energy meter and connected load on 20.10.2014, they have found that the Complainant was availing power supply of 2.761 K.W against C.D 1 K.W unauthorisedly and the meter was found defective. Thus, spot verification report was prepared in presence of the Complainant and provisional assessment was made vide Order No.1843, dtd.22.10.2014 for Rs.48,559.48 ps. (Rupees Forty eight thousand five hundred fifty nine and forty eight paisa) only. Both spot verification report and provisional assessment order was sent to the Complainant. Accordingly, final assessment order was prepared vide Order No.2264, dtd.31.12.2014 for Rs.21,000/- (Rupees Twenty one thousand) only with a liberty to pay the same within 30 days of receipt of this order and the same was sent to the Complainant. But, the Complainant without paying the same has approached this Forum for relief. 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. In view of 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.
7. 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 No.1 to 3 and on ex-parte against O.P No.4, but in the peculiar circumstances without any cost.
Pronounced in the open Forum on this day i.e. the 30th day of January, 2018 given under my Signature & Seal of the Forum.
