DATE OF FILING : 21-12-2012.
DATE OF S/R : 29-01-2013.
DATE OF FINAL ORDER : 05-06-2013.
Siboram Roy,
son of late Bipin Behari Royvillage & post office – Khadinan, P.S. Bagnan,
District – Howrah, PIN – 711303. ------------------------------------------------------------------- COMPLAINANT.
- Versus -
1. The Station Manager,
West Bengal State Electricity Distribution Company
Limited ( WBSEDCL ), Baganan – I, Electric Supply, Village and Post Office – Bagnan, District – Howrah, PIN - 711303.
2. The Divisional Manager,
WBSEDCL, Uluberia (D ) Division,
Banitabla, Uluberia,
Distict – Howrah – 711316.
3. Regional Manager,
WBSEDCL,
25-27, Netaji Subhas Road 3rd floor,
Kolkata – 700 001.
4. Zonal Manager,
Kolkata Zone, WBSEDCL,
19A, British Indian Street, 3rd floor,
Kolkata – 700 089. ------------------------------------------------OPPOSITE PARTIES.
P R E S E N T
President : Shri T.K. Bhattacharya, M.A. LL.B. WBHJS.
Member : Shri P.K. Chatterjee.
Member : Smt. Jhumki Saha.
F I N A L O R D E R
1. The instant case was filed by complainant U/S 12 of the C.P. Act, 1986,
as amended against the O.Ps. alleging deficiency in service U/S 2( 1 )( g ), 2( 1 )( o ) of the C.P. Act, 1986 wherein the complainant has prayed for passing necessary direction upon the O.Ps., WBSEDCL Authority for adjustment the erratic energy bill sent to the complainant including other relief as compensation and litigation costs.
2. The brief facts of the complaint is that the complainant is a bonafide
domestic consumer being consumer no. 133009768 of total connected load 0.72 kw. is consuming energy for his domestic purpose and the same is recording through a meter being no. L 307724. The complainant has paid his energy bill time to time so received and subsequently made an oral followed by a written complaint to the O.P. that electric bill so raised is excessive in nature. The complainant further raised objection categorically the inflated bill dated 12-04-2011 for the period Jan’11 to March’11 for Rs. 9,375/- against consumption 1652 units which subsequently modified by the O.P. by Rs. 7,816/- of unit consumption 1436 units. The complainant further requested to reconsider the said bill because of the fact that the bill so regenerated is still much excessive than the previous bills. Being considered the prayer the O.P. no. 2 further regenerated the bill and come down the amount to Rs. 5,091/- for the said billing period and the complainant paid this exorbitant bill on 06-06-2011. The complainant opined that the old domestic meter has been replaced on 22-06-2010 and the O.P. no. 1 sent electricity consumed bill on average basis for the period Aug’10 to Feb’11 without having taken any meter reading during the said period and the complainant paid the average bills within due date. Being aggrieved by this inflated bills sent by the O.Ps. the complainant made an application before the Deputy Assistant Director, Consumer Affairs & F.B. Department, Kolkata, to interfere the matter with the concerned WBSEDCL Authority which in turn tried to resolve the dispute through process of mediation at tripartite meeting which were attended by all the parties and disposed of the same by the said officers on 26-03-2012 and intimated the same to O.P. no. 2 for taking effective measure for set right the energy bill. But all attempts made by the complainant are in vain and the complainant finding no other alternative lodged this complaint before this Forum to relief his mental pain and agony for proper justice. Hence the case.
3. The o.p. herein Station Manager, WBSEDCL admitted the facts in their
written version regarding recording energy consumption through defective meter and thereby attempts have been made for arresting correct consumption by placing a separate meter side by side and recorded consumption for the period 04-01-2012 to 18-01-2012 and consumption found 75 units in both meters . It is also stated by the o.p. that the rectified energy bill has been sent to the complainant showing therein the correct consumption and the complaint lodged by the complainant is nothing but to harass the O.Ps. for his personal gain.
4. Upon pleadings of both parties two points arose for determination :
i) Is there any deficiency in service on the part of the O.Ps. ?
ii) Whether the complainant is entitled to get any relief as prayed for ?
DECISION WITH REASONS :
5. Both the points are taken up together for consideration. Admittedly the complainant raised / lodged complaint both verbally / written for excess raising of energy bills by the o.p. no. 2 against recording exorbitant energy consumption through the meter bearing no. L 307824 and sent inflated bill dated 12-04-2011 of Rs. 9,375/- for the period Jan’11 to Mar’11 which in turn revised subsequently and the energy bill comes to 1436 units of Rs. 5,091/- for the said period after giving due importance of the complaint lodged by the complainant and the complainant paid the said bill.
5. Unfortunately the complainant received another inflated bill for the period
Aug’10 to Feb’11 without taking any meter reading during the said period in spite of the facts that the old domestic meter was replaced on 22-06-2010. The complainant was terribly shocked when he received a bill dated 02-10-2011 for the period July,11 to September,2011 amounting to Rs. 5,385/- for consumed electricity of 1099 units which as it is noticed more than the double the earlier bill dated 20-07-2011 and the same has been paid with objection within the due date by the complainant. If we scan the previous bills we gave the unjustified squeezing tendency of the O.P. for April,2011 to June,2011 of Rs 2,084/- which was also paid by the complainant with due hardship.
7. Now if we take the ration of the above mentioned bill we get the positive result that interim phase of installation of new meter against old one side by side is full of anomalies and incorrect registering of the units. No acceptable argument is forthcoming on behalf of the O.Ps. as to how the bill dated 12-04-2011 and subsequent bills dated 20-07-2011, 02-10-2011 can be as exorbitant.
8. Therefore, we have no hesitation to hold our considered opinion that the bill dated 12-04-2011 amounting to Rs. 9,375/- reduced to Rs. 5,091/- ( 1436 units ) through regeneration is a question mark of correctness of raising the bill and also unit consumption 1275 units for the period July,2011 ;to September,2011 and 548 units for the period from April’11 to June’11 when the same consumed in the summer season.
9. There is no allegation of theft of energy from the same meters at the instance of erratic bills was within the knowledge of O.P. no. 1 as per record. It is not properly explained by the O.P. no. 1 as to how the same can be registered huge units for the consecutive bills and it is concluded that the existing meter is defective or malfunctioning and registered units sporadically is established from the erratic billing. Therefore, the bill so raised for June,2010 to onwards should be regenerated through computerized regenerating system taking into consideration the consumption unit for the period April’11 to June’11 with further consideration all the factors that leads to raising final bill as per WBSERC Norms.
In the result, the complaint succeeds.
Both the points are accordingly disposed of.
Hence,
O R D E R E D
That the C. C. Case No. 176 of 2012 (HDF 176 of 2012) be allowed on contest to some extent with a litigation cost of Rs. 1,000/.
The O.P.-1, WBSEDCL Authority, be directed to raise the revised energy bill through the computer regeneration system for the period from June,2010 to onwards within 30 days from the date of this order taking into consideration units for the period April,2011 to June, 2011 and adjust the bill according to the present consumption.
The o.p. is hereby also directed to pay a compensation of Rs. 2,000/- to the complainant for his mental pain and agony within one month from the date of this order i.d. the entire amount of Rs.3,000/- shall carry an interest @ 9% per annum till full realization.
The complainant is at liberty to put the decree into execution after expiry of the appeal period.
Supply the copies of the order to the parties, as per rule.
DICTATED & CORRECTED
BY ME.
(P.K. Chatterjee) (P. K. Chatterjee)
Member, C.D.R.F.,Howrah. Member, C.D.R.F.,Howrah.
( Jhumki Saha ) (T. K. Bhattacharya)
Member, C.D.R.F.,Howrah. President, C.D.R.F.,Howrah.
