DATE OF FILING                    :     19.12.2014..

DATE OF S/R                            :      04.03.2015.

DATE OF FINAL ORDER      :     13.10.2015.

Alok Kumar Poria,

son of late Rajendra Nath Poria,

residing at village Sajnagachi, P.O. Ganeshpur, P.S. Shyampur,

District Howrah,

PIN 711312.   ………………………………………………………… COMPLAINANT.

• Versus   -

1.         WBSEDCL Ltd.,

Bidyut Bhawan, Block DJ, Sector II, Salt Lake City,

Kolkata 700091.

2.         The Divisional Manager,

WBSEDCL Ltd., Uluberia Division, P.O. Uluberai ( Banitabla ),

District Howrah,

PIN 711316.

3.         The Station Manager,

WBSEDCL Ltd., Ulughata ( 58 Gate ),

Customer Care  Centre, P.O. Khurigachi, P.S. Shyampur,

District Howrah,

PIN 711312. ………………………………………………OPPOSITE PARTIES.

 P    R    E     S    E    N     T

Hon’ble President  :   Shri  B. D.  Nanda,  M.A. ( double ), L.L.M., WBHJS.

Hon’ble Member      :      Smt. Jhumki Saha.

Hon’ble Member : Shri A.K. Pathak . 

F  I   N   A    L       O   R   D    E     R

1. This is an application filed by complainant, Aloke Kumar Poria, against the O.ps., WBSEDCL Authority,  U/S 12 of the C. P. Act, 1986 wherein the complainant has  prayed for a direction upon the o.ps., WBSEDCL Authority,  to regenerate the disputed electric bills by making necessary adjustments. 

2. The case of the petitioner is that he is a regular customer of the o.ps. who sent him bill for the period January, 2014 to March, 2014 claiming Rs. 8,778/- and the same was paid on 06.01.2014. Similarly he paid Rs. 3,030/- on 02.04.2014 for the next three months and  Rs. 3,289/- for July, 2014 to September, 2014. The bill for October, 2014 to December, 2014 amounting to Rs. 9,317/- but the bill was taken part and outstanding dues was shown Rs. 6,641/-. The meter was defective but no steps were taken by the o.ps. The o.ps. insulted the petitioner. Hence the petitioner filed this case claiming Rs. 3,71,000/- from the o.ps. including compensation for mental agony and harassment and professional monetary loss being an advocate and others.  

3. The o.ps. contested the case by filing a written version denying the allegations made against them and submitted that the petitioner applied for adjustment of excessive units and replacement of defective meter on 04.01.2014 and the defective meter was received from the petitioner on 18.7.2014 and an inspection was carried out on 26.7.2014 and  he found no fault in the said meter and the petitioner further applied for installation of a series of meters for checking of the installed meter and quotation money was deposited and the checking was done and it was found that the existing meter was defective and the previous meter was replaced by a new meter on 23.8.2014 and the petitioner applied for adjustment of bill which was sent to the higher authority and no approval received from the higher authority. The o.ps. was ready to resolve the grievance for the bill period January, 2014 to September, 2014 and prayed for dismissal of the case. 

4. Upon pleadings of  parties the following  points arose for determination :

1. Is the case maintainable in its present form ?
2. Whether the petitioner has any cause of action to file the case ?
3. Whether  there is  any deficiency in service on the part of the O.Ps., WBSEDECL Authority
4. Whether the complainant is   entitled to get any relief as prayed for ? 

DECISION  WITH   REASONS      :

5. All the issues  are  taken up together for the sake of convenience and  brevity for discussion and to skip of reiteration. In the instant case, the petitioner prayed for direction upon the o.ps. to regenerate the disputed electric bills  by making adjustment and the o.ps. are also submitted in their written version that they sent letter of  the petitioner to their higher authority and no direction yet received.  This Forum on the other hand finds that our National Commission in the case of Biswanath Mukherjee vs. West Bengal State Electricity Board opined that  Consumer Forum cannot entertain electricity bill disputes. It is further stated that petitioner being a consumer of electricity has to apply before the Inspector designated  under the Indian  Electricity Act, 1910 and our Supreme Court in the case of CESC Ltd. vs. N.M. Banka and others specifically pointed out that the correct course for a  consumer with a dispute regarding the correctness of the electricity meter or of electricity bills showing consumption would be before the Electrical Inspector designated    and thus applying the same principle of law this  Forum also finds that this being a case in respect of bill as well as electricity meter. This Forum has nothing to do with such dispute.  The petitioner is to approach the Electrical Inspector designated and not this Forum.

         In view of above this Forum finds that the case is not maintainable before this Forum as it connected with electric poles as well as defective meters.

         In the result, the application fails.

         Court fee paid is correct.

            Hence,

                       O     R     D      E      R      E        D

           That the C. C. Case No. 648 of 2014 ( HDF 648 of 2014 )  be  and the same is dismissed on contest but without costs.   

           Supply the copies of the order to the parties, free of costs.  

DICTATED  &    CORRECTED

BY   ME.  

  (    B. D.  Nanda   )                                              

  President,  C.D.R.F., Howrah.