Haryana

Yamunanagar

CC/621/2013

Naresh Kumar S/o Kehar Singh - Complainant(s)

Versus

UHBVN ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

Complainant Inperson

14 Sep 2017

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTT.CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM YAMUNA NAGAR JAGADHRI

 

                                                                                    Complaint No.621 of 2013.

                                                                                    Date of Institution:21.8.2013.

                                                                                    Date of Decision:14.9.2017.

Naresh Kumar aged 51 years son of Shri Kehar Singh, resident of village Kishanpura, tehsil Chhahhrauli, Distt. Yamuna Nagar.

                                                                                           

                                                                                                               …Complainant.                                                      

                           Versus

UHBVNL, Op Sub Division, Chhachhrauli, District Yamuna Nagar through is S.D.O.

 

                                                                                                               ..Respondent.           

                                                                                   

Before: SH. SATPAL …………….    PRESIDENT

            SH. S.C. SHARMA  …………………………MEMBER.

            SMT. VEENA RANI SHEOKAND, ………...MEMBER

 

Present: Complainant in person.

              Sh.Sanjay Sharma, Advocate, for respondents.

 

ORDER   :       (SATPAL, PRESIDENT).

1.                     The complainant has filed this complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 against the respondent (hereinafter the respondent shall be referred as OP). 

2.                     Brief facts of the present complaint, as alleged by the complainant, are that the complainant is consumer of the OP having tube well connection bearing account No.B3-263 installed in the fields of the complainant and has been paying the bills regularly as per the demand of the OP.  At present, the Op is charging from the complainant @5.85ps per unit but according to the Sales Circular U-46/2009 effective from 1.12.2009, the Horticulture & Fisheries connections were included in Agriculture category and billing of the same has to be made @25paisa per unit.  Accordingly, the complainant moved a complaint before this Forum on 3.2.2011 which was decided on 27.4.2012 in which OP made a statement that they will convert the category in accordance with Sales Circular No.46/2009, but till date the OP did not comply with the order despite several requests.  Now in the month of December-2012, the meter of the complainant was burnt, for which the application was given to the OP and he deposited Rs.3150/-on 22.2.2013, for new meter and on 2.3.2013 new meter was installed.  However, during that period the billing was made on the basis of fixed consumption.  The complainant also moved an application for correction of bill after deducting the excessive amount on account of burnt meter and the Op agreed to make the necessary correction in the next bill.  On 29.7.2013, due to technical fault in the electric line, the meter of the tube well connection of the complainant became defective and stopped working and an application dated 1.8.2013 was moved by the complainant but the JE Sunil Kumar refused to remove the defect on the plea that the bill is pending.  The complainant tried to make as also and SDO Ashish Chopra understand that the amount under bill is subject to some rectification because earlier his meter was burnt and as and when the correct bill is issued, he will make the payment but they refused to redress his grievances.  The complainant came to know that the bills of his neighbourers having account No.B-3-262, B-3-264 and B-3-265 have also been pending but their connections were made in running condition.  Due to fault in the line of the tube well connection, the complainant suffered mental agony and harassment and prayed for acceptance of complaint by directing the OP to make necessary correction in the bill of the complainant and to provide estimate of cost for conversion of the connection of the complainant to agriculture category as per Sales Circular No.U-46/2009 and to pay Rs.50000/- for the loss of crop suffered by the complainant and also to pay Rs.40000/- as compensation on account of mental agony and harassment and further to pay Rs.5000/- as cost of proceedings. 

3.                     Upon notice, the OP appeared and filed their written statement by taking some preliminary objections alleging therein that the complainant is not legally maintainable; the complainant has got no locus standi to file the present complaint; the complainant is legally estopped by his own act and conduct to file the present complaint; the complaint is liable to be dismissed as there is no deficiency in service on the part of the OP; the complainant has concealed the true and material facts from this Hon’ble Forum.  The true facts are that the complainant had applied for Electricity Connection for Horticulture Category purpose (commercial use) vide application NO.59894 H/SP. The complainant has filed an application and agreement form in respect of LT Industrial category and as per the Sales Circular No.46/2009 of the Nigam, the Horticulture and Fisheries category are included in the agriculture metered category and the billing is to be made at the rate of 25 paisa per unit and at the same terms and conditions as applicable to Agriculture Connection w.e.f.1.12.2006.  On merits the pleas taken by the complainant has been controverted and reiterated the stand taken in the preliminary objections.  There is no deficiency in service on the part of the OP and prayed for dismissal of complaint with costs.

4.                     To prove his case the complainant tendered into evidence his affidavit as annexure C.X, documents such as copy of bill as annexure C.1, copy of application dated 1.8.2013 as annexure C.2, copy of Sales Circular No.U-46/2009 as annexure C.3, copy of Jamabandi as annexure C.4 and closed his evidence.

5.                     On the other hand, OP failed to tender any evidence, hence, the evidence of the OP was closed by court order vide order dated 5.4.2016.

6.                     We have heard the complainant as well as the learned counsel for the OP and gone through the pleadings as well as documents placed on the file. 

7.                     After hearing the parties and going through the pleadings as well as documents placed on the file, it is clear that the complainant is consumer of the OP and has been paying the bills regularly.  It is also clear and admitted by both the parties that the UHBVNL issued a Sales Circular No.U-46/2009 having subject “Conversion of Horticulture and Fisheries into Agriculture category”, the facts of the circular are reproduced as under:-

This is with reference to S.C.No.U-72/2006 issued vide S.C.Memo no.Ch.24/SS-403/Horticulture/loose file dated 26.10.2006 regarding revised rate of electricity tariff of Horticulture and Fisheries.

The matter has now been reviewed by the State Government and it has been decided that the Horticulture and Fisheries connections are included in the Agriculture metered category.  As such billing of the Horticulture and Fisheries consumer be made at the rate of 25 paisa per/unit under the same terms and conditions as applicable to the Agriculture consumers w.e.f.1.12.2006.

All the connections (existing) be got shifted to the Agriculture feeders at consumer cost.

The above instructions should be brought to the notice of all concerned for strict and careful compliance.

                        From the perusal of the Sales Circular issued by the Nigam, it is clear that the officers/officials of the Nigam did not adhere to their own circulars.  Further it is relevant to mention here that during the trial of this case, the OP did not bother to place anything on record in evidence to falsify or to controvert the pleas of the complainant.  Hence, the deficiency in service on the part of the Ops is proved and resultantly the complainant suffered mental agony, harassment on account of negligent, deficient and carelessness act andconduct of the Ops.

                        Resultantly, we partly allow the complaint of the complainant and direct the OP to convert the tube well connection of the complainant from Horticulture to Agriculture category and overhaul the account of the complainant by calculating the rate of unit @25 paisa per unit w.e.f.1.12.2006.  The OP is also directed to issue the estimate cost, if any, to shift the Horticulture connection to Agriculture connection as per Sales Circular to the complainant within one month from the date of this order, thereafter, the complainant will deposit the estimate cost as is to be supplied by the Op within one month from the date of receipt of estimate cost.  Further the Op is also directed to issue the fresh bill after overhauling the account of the complainant as directed above.  Parties are left to bear their own costs.  Copies of this order be supplied to the parties concerned free of costs.  File be consigned to the record-room after due compliance.

Announced in open Court:14.9.2017.                                     

                                                                                                (SATPAL)

                                                                                                PRESIDENT

 

 (VEENA RANI SHEOKAND)                                       (S.C. SHARMA)

  MEMBER.                                                                      MEMBER.