Date of filing: 03.05.2017 Date of disposal: 22.02.2018
Complainant: Jiten Sankar Koley, S/o. Late Chandi Charan Koley, resident of Vill.-Arasul, P.O.-
Jamalpur, P.S.-Jamalpur, Dist.-Burdwan, Pin-713408.
-VERSUS-
Opposite Party No.1.: The Station Manager, Jamalpur Customer Care Centre, WBSEDCL,
Jamalpur, Burdwan, P.O.-Jamalpur, Dist.-Burdwan, Pin-713408.
2. The Regional Manager, RGRO, Bardhaman of Regional Office,
WBSEDCL, Burdwan, Monimath, 2nd floor, G.T. Road, Burdwan, P.O.,
P.S. & Dist.-Burdwan, Pin-713101.
3. WBSEDCL, represented by its Chairman, having its office at Bidyut
Bhawan, 5th floor, Block-C, Sector-2, Salt Lake, Kolkata-91.
Present: Hon’ble President: Smt.Jayanti Maitra(Ray).
Hon’ble Member: Miss Nivedita Ghosh.
Hon’ble Member : Dr. Tapan Kr. Tripathy.
Appeared for the Complainant: Ld. Advocate Anirban Banerjee.
Appeared for the Opposite Parties: Ld. Advocate, Biswanath Nag.
JUDGEMENT
This is a case U/s. 12 of the C.P. Act for an award directing the O.Ps. to refund money amounting to Rs.9,401/-, to pay Rs.34,860/- as to loss of Aman Paddy, to pay compensation of Rs.50,000/- towards mental pain, agony and harassment and to pay 10,000/- as litigation cost to the complainant.
The complainant’s case in short is that he is a C (T) category customer of WBSEDCL, Jamalpur and his consumer ID No.517068585 and his source of income is cultivation and maintained his livelihood from this income.
The complainant stated that when he cultivate his Aman Paddy in his agriculture land suddenly the electric supply in his connection of Submersible meter become disturbed and without electricity the petitioner could not cultivate Aman Paddy due to lack of water for irrigation. Not only that this time of Potato season, if there is no water due to lack of electric supply then the potato cultivation also face entirely loss.
That petitioner loss of incurred Aman Paddy which is given below:-
Total cultivated land property is 7 Bighas (approx).
Average rate of production is 16 Basta per Bigha
Loss of production per Bigha is 6 Basta per Bigha i.e. total loss is 6 X 7=42 Basta.
Present market value of Paddy per Basta is Rs.8.30/- i.e Rs.8.30 X 42 = Rs.34,860/-.
So, the petitioner incurred loss of Rs.34,860/- in cultivating the Aman Paddy.
The complainant lodged a complain before the O.P. No.1 on 4.10.2016 by a toll free number, being complaint No.5458044 and docket No.5665923. Thereafter the O.P. come to the complainant and after inspection of the problem of electricity, it is disconnected without any prior notice though the petitioner paid all electric bills. The complainant sent letters to the O.P. No.1, 2 & 3 on 25.10.2016 and 23.11.2016 respectively regarding defective meter and disconnection of electric connection. The O.P. No.1 sent a quotation dated 8.11.2016 for burnt meter without any testing and requested to deposit Rs.9,401/- before O.P. No.1.
After receiving the quotation the complainant became astonished and wanted to know from the O.P. No.1, why petitioner will pay such amount of Rs. 9,401/- the meter is property of WBSEDCL under Govt. of W.B. and Govt. has been supplying meter to all consumer but the O.P. No.1 did not give any reply. The conduct of the O.P. No.1 amounts to deficiency in service as it is a fault imperfection, inadequacy in the nature and manner of performing which is required to be maintained by the O.P. No.1.
However the complainant deposited Rs.9,401/- in the counter of the O.P. No.1 on 6.12.2016. After receiving the petitioner’s complaint dated 23.11.2016 served a letter to the O.P. No.2 stating inter-alia to arrange one hearing in presence of the petitioner and the O.P. No.1 redress very urgently. The O.P. No.2 sent that notice to the complainant dated 8.12.2016 which the complainant received after expiry of hearing date fixed on 16.12.2016. The petitioner could not appear on that date of hearing as the said notice is posted late and it goes to show on the postal stamp on envelope wherein it is found that there is a seal of post office on 20.12.2016. Thereafter the complainant got a letter dated 16.12.2016 from the O.P. No.2 wherein it is mentioned that dismissal of hearing of grievance petition No.68/2016. Finding no other alternatives the complainant filed this case before this Forum for relief as stated above.
The O.Ps. contested this case by filing written version denying inter-alia all the material allegations as alleged by the complainant. These O.Ps. also submit that the service connection having consumer ID No.517068585 stands in the name of the complainant Jiten Sankar Koley of Kalara, Jamalpur, Dist.-Burdwan and the said connection was effected for agriculture with a load of 4.39 KVA on 25.3.1983 and since installation of meter the energy bills were being raised as per actual consumption when the performance of the meter were Okay but it is apparent from the available records the complainant lodged a complaint No.5665923 and after receipt of the complaint the technical staff of these O.Ps. attended the place where meter was installed and found that the meter bearing No.RS X 51824 which was existing since 29.4.2014 was burnt due to overload running or short circuit and all the terminals of said meter were also found melted and the same was not in repairable condition and under the above condition the service connection was disconnected to maintain the rule of safety as per norms of WBSEDCL and the meter was totally burnt out and a quotation amounting to Rs.9,401/- as damage charge of meter was served on 8.11.2016 as per Rules & Regulations of WBSEDCL and since thereafter the complainant has not prayed for connection with an undertaking to pay average bill to continue his submersible pump for cultivation so long the meter is being replaced by a new one. Even the complainant has not informed about the clearance of punctured/damaged wire along with other electrical equipment i.e. cut out, main switch etc. which were also affected by the incident and accordingly during the period 4.10.2016 to 8.12.2016 the burnt meter installed at the complainant’s premises and the periodic energy bills showing Zero unit as no electricity was consumed and thereafter the complainant has paid the quotational amount ofRs.9,401/- on 6.12.2016 and after receipt the quotational amount the burnt meter was replaced on 8.12.2016 by a new one being No.GXO35544. But the complainant knowing everything lodged a complaint before the D.E. & R.G.R.O., Regional Office, Burdwan and the date of hearing was fixed on 16.12.2016 and on that date the S.M. Jamalpur C.C.C. was present but the complainant did not attend the hearing and accordingly the said grievance petition was dismissed by the D.E. & R.G.R.O., Regional Office, Burdwan on 16.12.2016 and again the complainant filed the complaint case on false and concocted allegations which is fit to be dismissed with cost.
These O.ps. further submit that in view of the Provision 42(5) & 42 (6) of the Electricity Act, 2003 and the Rules & Regulation made there under, if there is any grievance with regard to any bill or quotation in respect of any service connection that should be ventilated before the Regulatory Commission or before the person or authority empowered by the said Act.
DECISION WITH REASONS
To prove the case the complainant has filed his evidence on affidavit stating the fact which he had stated in his complaint petition. He also filed documents letter dated 25.10.2016 informing the non-supply of electricity in his Submersible Pump and non-functioning of the meter. He also filed letter dated 23.11.2016 that for non-supply of electricity due to meter damaged. He also incurred loss in cultivation. The complainant also filed the copy of letter which he received from WBSEDCL showing charges applicable against burnt meter, amount payable Rs.9,401/-. That the letter dated 8.12.2016 a notice seeking representation of complainant on 16.12.2016 in hearing U/s.42(6) of Electricity Act. The postal receipt showing that the said letter was received at Jamalpur Post Office on 20.12.2016 with the postal stamp. He filed the copy of letter dated 16.12.2016 of O.P. informing that the complainant did not attend the said meeting on 16.12.2016 and the grievance petition was dismissed for default. The complainant also filed electric bills for the relevant period.
The O.ps. filed copy of Regulation 2010 of West Bengal Electricity Regulatory Commission and 11.4 of the Rule, the O.ps. cited, that where the meter is found to have been tampered with or the cause of burning/defect of the meter is attributable to the consumer, the meter will be replaced only after deposit of its cost and other statutory formalities within specified time limit. The O.Ps. prayed to treat their written version as their evidence on affidavit. In the written version of the O.Ps. stated that the said meter was burnt due to over load running or short circuit and the meter was found melted and was not in repairable condition. It also caused damaged to wire and other electrical equipment and that during the period 4.10.2016 to 8.12.2016 periodic energy bill claiming ‘Zero’ unit was served. O.Ps. admitted that the complainant paid quotational amount of Rs.9,401/- on 4.12.2016 and the meter was replaced on 8.12.2016. O.Ps. alleged that complainant did not attend the meeting on 16.12.2016 and the grievance petition was dismissed. Further O.Ps. argues that U/s.42 (5) (6) of the Electricity Act the complainant did not ventilate his grievance before Regulatory Commission, the Authority empowered to hear the grievance agitated by consumer and that this Forum has no authority to try the case etc. So, the O.Ps. nowhere in the written version stated that the meter was burnt due to any action of tampered with the meter or any cause of burning attributable to the consumer for such burning of the meter. The Ld. Lawyer of the O.ps. cited a judgment which is reported in [2007] 0 Supreme(SC) 1061 wherein stated that ‘competent Authority machinery as a has been provided for redressal of grievances of individual consumers’.
On the other hand the complainant stated that as per admission of the O.Ps. the meter was burnt due to over load running/short circuit. Therefore, the complainant had nothing to do and he is not at all liable for the damage of the meter due to burning. However, he had been facing financial loss in agriculture. So, he deposited the quotation amount of Rs.9,401/- only for purpose of his cultivation, the source of his livelihood. Therefore, the O.Ps. cannot realize the damage charge for replacement of the meter as O.Ps. failed to prove that damage to the meter is attributable to the complainant. There is no evidence in this regard. The complainant has been able to prove that he is entitled to get refund of the money amounting to Rs.9,401/- for replacement of the damaged meter. However, the complainant failed to prove by sufficient documentary evidence that he incurred loss of Rs.34,860/- in Aman Paddy during the period which he claimed in his petition of complaint but it is argued by the Ld. Lawyer of the complainant that the complainant necessarily undergone harassment, mental pain and agony and pecuniary loss etc. for deficiency and negligence of service of the O.Ps. Therefore, the complainant is also entitled to get compensation for such mental pain and harassment.
After hearing argument of both sides and on perusal of petition of complaint the evidence on record as well as documents filed by the parties this Forum find that complainant has been able to prove his case that O.Ps. were deficient and negligent in service and he is entitled to get relief. Thus complaint case succeeds in part. C.F. paid is correct.
Hence, it is
Ordered
that the case be and the same is allowed on contest in part against the O.Ps.
The O.Ps. are directed to refund Rs.9,401/- to the complainant which is received from the complainant as charge for replacement of the burnt meter with a new one.
The O.Ps. are also directed to pay Rs.2000/- as compensation towards mental pain, agony and harassment to the complainant.
The O.Ps. are further directed to pay Rs.1000/- as litigation cost to the complainant.
The above all directions be complied with within 45 days from this date of order, failing which the complainant is at liberty to execute this order in accordance with law.
Let the copies of this order be supplied to the parties free of cost.
Jayanti Maitra (Ray)
Dictated and corrected by me. President
D.C.D.R.F., Burdwan
Jayanti Maitra (Ray)
President
D.C.D.R.F., Burdwan
(Nivedita Ghosh) (Dr. Tapan Kr. Tripathy)
Member Member
D.C.D.R.F., Burdwan D.C.D.R.F., Burdwan
