PER JUSTICE K.S. CHAUDHARI, PRESIDING MEMBER

This revision petition has been filed by the petitioner against order dated 12-01-2009 passed by State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Haryana (in short, ‘the State Commission’) in Appeal No. 774/2008 –  Ram Mehar Singh  Vs. Uttari Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Ltd., by which while dismissing appeal, order of District Forum dismissing complaint was upheld.

2.      Brief facts of the case are that complainant/petitioner was consumer of opposite party/respondent.  Opposite party issued bill on 05-09-2006 and demanded Rs.1,20,000/- as penalty, which is illegal.  It was further submitted that his connection has been disconnected wrongly.  Alleging deficiency on the part of opposite party, complainant filed complaint before District Forum.  Opposite party resisted complaint and submitted that complainant’s poultry farm was checked on 05.09.2006 and complainant was found stealing energy by taking direct supply, so meter was disconnected and demand was raised and prayed for dismissal of complaint.  Learned District Forum after hearing both the parties dismissed complaint.  Appeal filed by the complainant was dismissed by learned State Commission vide impugned order, against which this revision petition has been filed.

3.      Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused record.

4.      Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that no theft of electricity was proved against petitioner even then learned District Forum committed error in dismissing complaint and learned State Commission further committed error in dismissing appeal, hence revision petition be allowed and impugned order be set aside.  On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent submitted that as demand was raised on account of theft of electricity, complaint was not maintainable before Consumer Fora and order passed by learned State Commission is in accordance with law, hence revision petition be dismissed.

5.      Perusal of record reveals that demand was raised on account of alleged theft of electricity by the complainant.  Complainant was found stealing energy by taking direct supply.  In the light of judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of U.P. Power Corporation Ltd. & Ors. Vs. Anis Ahmad, complaint pertaining to theft of electricity is not maintainable before Consumer Forum and in such circumstances revision petition is liable to be dismissed.

6.         Consequently, revision petition filed by the petitioner is dismissed with liberty to the petitioner to approach to the appropriate authority under Indian Electricity Act for Redressal of his grievance with no order as to costs.