The fact of the case of the complainant is that the complainant got an erroneous electric bill for the period February, 2016 to April, 2016 and the meter
reading in that bill is inflated. The further case of the complainant is that after getting the said bill the complainant rushed to the office of the Station Superintendent, Chandernagore . The Superintended told him to pay the first instalment of the bill and thereafter the WBSEDCL installed one series meter on 27.2.2016. From the reading it appears that the new series of meter shows that only 37 unit is being used by the complainant and the defective meter show that the complaint is being used 248 units. After seeing that incident the complainant praying for changing the defective electric meter being no.L0811374 and refund and/or adjust the amount which amount has already been deposited by the complainant vide receipt no.145298. The OP A.E & Station Manager sent a letter to the complainant dated 22.3.2016 and admitted has been lodged complain is defective and the reading was recorded in the yellow card and also stated ina the letter that the defective meter will be replaced soon by technical staff and also told assured that the excess payment for the month of February 2016 will be adjusted and a revised bill for the said period will be issued shortly. Thereafter, the complainant received a notice from the Op on 26.4.2016 where the oP no. 1 told the complainant to pay the exorbitant bill amount otherwise the electric line
will be disconnected. Thereafter, the oP disconnected the electric line of premises of the complainant . Hence, this complaint filed by the complainant praying for relief as stated in the prayer portion of the complaint.
The Op contested the case by filing Written version denying inter alia all material allegations. The case of the Op is that bill for the month of February 2016 to April 2016 has been generated considering the consumption period 8.11.2015 to 9.2.2016 as per quarterly billing system. It is to be noted that as per quarterly billing system physical meter reading was taken by the meter reade4r on 9.2.2016 and at the time of generation the bill no abnormalities in the meter bearing no. L0811374 was found and after getting the same bill neither the consumer lodged any written complaint regarding the meter reading nor booked any online complaint before the first due date which was on 19.2.2016. The consumer instead of lodging any complaint made payment of the bill for the month of February 2016 on 19.2.2016. It is to be noted that in the complaint there was no mention of rectification of the bill for the period February 2016 to April 2016. On receiving the letter of complaint one check meter was installed in series with existing meter to identify whether the meter in question is defective or not. The meter in question although seems to had been defective within the
period 9.2.2016 but the petitioner wants to get refund back the amount of the billing amount which was raised on good condition of the meter. The WBSEDCL also told that the defective meter will be replaced soon. The outstanding billing amount for the period upto March 2016 is lying due and based on which the Op disconnected the electricity line of the complainant . The OP prays for dismissal of the case.
Complainant filed photo-copy of letter dated 20.2.16 addressed to the Station Superintendent, WBSEDCL, another letter dated 14.3.2016 , Photo copy of Memo no. lCND-11/series meter/2147 dated 22.3.16 sent by WBSEB to the complainant, photocopy of bill dated 26.4.16, Photocopy of Advocate’s letter dated 10.5.16, Photo copy of letter addressed to the complainant sent by WBSEDCL dated 19.5.16, Photocopy of letter dated 27.5.16 sent by the complainant to the OP. Photo copy of Memo no.CND-11/Consumer/600 dated 20.6.16 sent by WBSEDCL to the complainant and other copy of documents. Complainant also filed Evidence in chief and Written Notes of argument.
Op on the other hand filed Evidence in chief and Written Notes of argument.
POINTS FOR DECISION :
- Whether the complainant is a consumer ?
- Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of the oP ?
- Whether the complainant/petitioner is entitled to get relief as prayed for ?
DECISION WITH REASONS :
Point no.1
It is admitted fact that the complainant is a bona fide consumer under the Op being consumer id no.163233183 and installation no.01721114. So the complainant is a consumer under the OP u/s 2(d)(ii) of the C.P.Act 1986. The point no. 1 is thus answered in favour of the complainant.
Point no.2 and 3
Both the points are taken up together for easiness of discussion.
It appears from the material on record mainly the allegation of the complainant that the exorbitant amount of bill was due to defective meter and Op is also by his letter dated 22.3.2016 addressed to Sandip Kumar Rakshit that meter seems to be defective and will be replaced soon by the technical staff. Old meter was running fastly . Another thing also appears that the initial reading on 27.2.2016 was 371. Final reading on 9.3.2016 was 408. Therefore, unit consumed shown by the series meter 37 units i.e. unit consumed during one month, as per their records 37 units, whereas unit consumed by the Old meter during that
period is 248 unit i.e. seventh times of the normal reading by the series meter. So, the allegation of the complainant become admits by letter dated 22.3.2016 by the A.E., and Station Manager, Chandernagore 2, CCC, WBSEDCL regarding the consumer no. 163233183. So, there are no need to further discussion because the documents before us shows the veracity in the allegation of the complainant. It is pertinent to note that the complainant has paid some amount and Op has disconnected the electric line. Such act of the Op when their meter was defective is extremely condemned as highhandedness of the public officials also goes against their own statement in the aforesaid letter. This act is utter negligence of duty and without due care and attention. The Op must compensate the complainant for his negligent work. It will be justice to the party if the complainant now gets his connection and Op is also entitled the cost actual consumption as the rate stated in his letter and shown by the series meter. Hence it is –
Ordered
That the CC no.145 of 2016 be and the same is allowed on contest. Both the Ops are jointly and severally liable to reconnect the electric connection of the premises of the complainant within 3 days from the date of this order. The Op is
also directed to replace the old defective meter by a new one and to issue monthly electric bill as per reading of the replaced electric meter reading to the complainant. The Ops also directed to refund the excess amount comparing the replaced meter reading and defective meter reading as was given in the past bill or future adjustment. The Op is further directed to pay Rs.10,000/- to the complainant towards litigation cost.
The Opposite parties shall comply the above order within 30 days from the date of this order. But the oP shall reconnect the electric line of the premises of the complainant within 3 days from the date of this order.
Let a copy of this order be made over to the parties free of cost.
