Haryana

Ambala

CC/261/2016

Shaym Lal - Complainant(s)

Versus

UHBVN Ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

Jaswinder Singh

16 Feb 2018

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, AMBALA.

       Complaint Case No. :  261 of 2016

       Date of Institution    :   24.06.2016

        Date of Decision      :   16.02.2018 

 

Shayam Lal s/o  Pritam Singh r/o H.No.16/26, Ranjit Nagar, Ambala City.

 

……Complainant.

Versus

 

1.Utter Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Ltd.  (UHBVN) through SDO East Sub-Division, Ambala City.

2.Utter Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Ltd. (UHBVN) through Superintendent Engineer, Operation Circle, Ambala City.

3.Utter Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Ltd. (UHBVN) through XEN, ‘OP’ Division Ambala City.

……Opposite Parties

 

Complaint Under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act

 

CORAM:    SH. D.N. ARORA, PRESIDENT.

                   SH. PUSHPENDER KUMAR, MEMBER.

                   MS.ANAMIKA GUPTA, MEMBER

                  

Present:       Sh. Jaswinder Singh, for complainant.

                   Sh. A.S.Nehra, Adv. counsel for Ops.

 

ORDER

 

                   In nutshell, brief facts of the complaint are that complainant is having domestic electricity connection bearing account No.YHU01-2606H (Old account No.No-M3-1710) with a sanctioned load 0.1 KW.  He has been making the payment of bills regularly and nothing was due towards him.  the complainant received a notice memo No.20P6/CA dated 07.12.2015 from OP No.1  wherein it has been mentioned that during the course of checking by the audit party of UHBVN office found that the energy meter installed against account No.HU-01-2606 was dead/missing/stop/glass broken from 06/2011 to 07/2014 and the electricity department has charged less from the complainant and an amount of Rs.28522/- is proposed to be charged against him.  The complainant visited the OPs but no satisfactory reply was given to him. The act and conduct of the OPs clearly amounts to deficiency in service on their part. In evidence, the complainant has tendered affidavit Annexure CX and documents Annexure C1 to Annexure C4.          

2.                Upon notice, OPs appeared and filed joint reply to the complaint wherein it has been submitted that the complainant has not come to this Forum with clean hands the present complaint is not maintainable. The electricity department has charged difference of the units which have been shown in bill as per meter reading which was checked from May 2012 to May 2014. It is a fact that average of 100 units were taking in the bill than the computer would charge the average bill automatically instead of taking actual reading of consumption of electricity but the meter was OK as per JE report on dated 11.03.2016 and after checking of meter the computer has charged the actual consumption of units of the meter. The actual reading of the meter was recorded regularly by the employee of electricity department i.e. meter reader and as per actual difference of the units the audit party has raised the actual amount of actual consumption of electricity consumed by the complainant between the period of May 2012 to May 2014 and overhauled the bill of the complainant. There is no deficiency in service on the part of OPs. Other contentions have been controverted and prayer for dismissal of the complaint has been made. In evidence, the OPs have tendered affidavit Annexure RX and documents Annexure R1 to Annexure R2.

4.                We have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the record very carefully.

5.                The OPs in their reply have submitted that the Nigam is charging the difference of the units shown in bill as per meter reading which was checked from May 2012 to May 2014 which was noted by the audit party during its audit, therefore, the bill has rightly been issued to the complainant and the complainant is liable to make the payment thereof. In support of this plea learned counsel for the OPs drew the attention of this Forum towards Internal Audit Half Margin Report Annexure R2.  Perusal of the case file reveals that the complainant had moved an application Annexure R1 to the OPs regarding showing of excess units but in the bottom of the application the status of the meter has been shown as working. Had it been so, it is not understandable as to why the Ops have charged the bill on average basis. Another strange factor which this Forum has noticed that the meter was not got checked from any lab qua its physical status but without getting any lab test the working of the meter has been shown as OK. There is nothing on the case file to show that prior to this no demand notice was ever issued by the OPs and this time also it has been done on the asking of the Internal Audit Department of OPs. Otherwise, the complainant has been paying the bills regularly and this fact is not disputed by the OPs. Though the Ops have placed on case file Internal Audit Half Margin reports as Annexure R2 but it is strange that no date of audit has been mentioned in these documents which shows that either the same have been prepared just to fill the lacuna or to make only paper transactions without verifying the ground reality.  Moreover, it was the duty of the Nigam to explain as to why they kept on sending the bills on average basis for long period. Undisputedly, the sanctioned load is 1  KW and the OPs have sent the demand for almost two years on the basis of Internal Audit but no date of said audit has been disclosed. The electricity department is a government institute but it appears that the OPs have taken the matter in a casual manner without taking-care the interest of the consumer and such like behavior from government institute is not acceptable and due to the lapse on the part of OPs the complainant has to suffer mental agony and in order to get her grievance redress she has to knock at the door of this Forum.

7.                          Keeping in view the above facts and circumstances it is clear that the complainant has proved his case by leading cogent and reliable evidence and the Ops are found deficient in providing services to her.  Hence, we allow the present complaint with costs which is assessed at Rs.3,000/- and notice dated 07.12.2015 Annexure C-4 for demanding the amount of Rs.28522/- which has been issued on the basis of audit report Annexure R2 is hereby quashed. In the interest of justice the OPs are directed to overhaul the account of the complainant without surcharge for the period from August 2012 to June 2014 on the basis of consumption recorded by meter now installed at the premises from August 2016 to June 2017. The amount deposited by the complainant as part payment/ electricity charges be adjusted in the account of the complainant by issuing the bill afresh after overhauling the account. Copy of the order be sent to the parties concerned, free of costs, as per rules. Order be complied within a period of 30 days. File after due compliance be consigned to record room.

 

ANNOUNCED ON: 16.02.2018                                         

 

 

 

(ANAMIKA GUPTA)       (PUSHPENDER KUMAR)           (D.N.ARORA)    

     MEMBER                             MEMBER                                    PRESIDENT