Order No. 08
Date: 07.02.2019
The record is put up today for order.
The appeal was heard on earlier date of hearing in presence of both sides.
The instant appeal is directed towards the impugned order dated 31.07.2018 passed by the Hon’ble D.C.D.R.C., Purulia in Case No. CC/06/2018.
In filing appeal u/s 15 of C.P. Act, 1986, it is alleged that the Ld. Forum failed to give proper attention of mind while passing the order on 31.07.2018. The OP/respondent illegally raised a demand of Rs 12104=00 as outstanding amount mentioned in the bill dated 11.04.2017 for the bill period July 2005 to Sept. 2005. The Ld. D.C.D.R.F., Purulia failed to notice that though ‘Stop Metre’ was mentioned on the bill and the 4 digits metre was removed from the premises of the appellant, still unlawfully outstanding amount of Rs. 12104=00 was raised in the bill dated 11.04.2007 for the bill period July 2005 to September 2005 which was absurd. It is also alleged that Ld. President D.C.D.R.F., Purulia failed to observe that the OP/ respondent had shown negligence by not appearing before Sub- Divisional Legal Service Committee, Raghunathpur, Purulia being Registered as pre-litigation No 79 of 2017 dated 17.09.2017.
The appellant also alleged that the Ld. D.C.D.R.F., Purulia failed to notify that the OP was negligent for not preparing of the bill as per rules and demanded excess bill amount abnormally against a stopped dead metre taking average metre reading which question the efficiency in service. Appellant could not produce before Ld. D.C.D.R.F., Purulia receipts of payments of bills after 08.06.2003 as the same were not available at that time.
The petitioner appeal for stay order for further proceedings of OP against the realisation of demand to the tune of Rs. 33431.68 for LPSC for the period 07/2005 to 09/2005 and to set aside the order passed by Ld. D.C.D.R.C.F., Purulia in Case No. CC/06/2018 and to pass such order as it may deem fit and proper in the matter of award in favour of the petitioner/appellant.
Now we go through the case of the Complainant/appellant to decide over the merit of the appeal.
Sri Satya Sadhan Chatterjee, the complainant, aged about 83 years is a consumer of electric energy having a Consumer ID No. 242017918 and domestic consumer No. 720023 under West Bengal State Electricity Distribution Company Limited (WBSEDCL) represented by Station Manager of Adra Customer Care Centre, Purulia, PIN – 723121 and paid electric bill upto June 2005 as usual. Complainant noticed that metre of his premises was stopped and received an electric bill on 11.04.2007 for the period 28.06.2005 to 27.03.2007 where Rs. 12104=00 was shown as outstanding amount for the period July 2005 to Sept. 2005 and ‘Stop Metre’ mentioned in the said bill. The complainant paid Rs. 12104=00 against the outstanding amount on 09.03.2017, almost 09 years later receiving the bill. Earlier the appellant informed OP on 03.05.2006, 25.06.2007 and 30.11.2016 to send revised bill removing the irregularities considering the appellant as a domestic consumer. As per record OP did not respond. Complainant received another bill on 25.09.2018 demanding Rs. 33,431.68/- toward LPSC for the period July,2005 to Sept., 2005. The appellant filed a petition to the Chairman, Sub-Divisional Legal Service Committee on 17.04.2017 to resolve the excess demand of Rs. 12104/- along with further demand of Rs. 33,431.68/- for LPSC.
Sub-Divisional Legal Service Committee directed Station Manager, W.B.S.E.D.C.L., Adra, Purulia for S/R and appearance on 08.07.2017, 09.09.2017 and 09.12.2017. On each occasion appellant was present but OP was absent. Ultimately S.D.L.S.C., Raghunathpur, Purulia, advised petitioner/appellant to go to Consumer Court. Complainant filed the complaint u/s 12 of C.P. Act, 1986 at Hon’ble D.C.D.R.F., Purulia on 30.01.2018 praying for refund of Rs 12104=00 along with interest @ 10 %from 09.03.2017, waive up of demand for Rs. 33,431.68/- towards LPSC, payment for compensation of Rs. 10,000/- for causing mental pain and agony and Rs. 10,000/- as litigation cost.
Hon’ble D.C.D.R.F., Purulia observed that Rs.4449/- had been charged for bill period 28.06.2005 to 27.03.2007 (21 months) and previous and present reading were same as the metre was stopped and 1800 units were taken on average and outstanding amount of Rs. 12104/- was paid after a long time.
The complainant failed to produce any documents regarding payment of electric bill after 08.06.2003 before Hon’ble D.C.D.R.F., Purulia. Complainant also failed to submit the bill for demand of Rs. 33,431.68/- for LPSC. Hon’ble D.C.D.R.F., Purulia finally dismissed the Complaint, Case No. CC/06/2018 without cost.
Complainant being dissatisfied and aggrieved with impugned order dated 30.07.2018 passed by Ld. D.C.D.R.F., Purulia in CC/06/2018 preferred the instant appeal on the grounds stated earlier.
Mr. Uttam Kumar Chakraborty, Ld. Advocate for the appellant has submitted that demand for outstanding amount of Rs. 12104/- for the period of July 2005 to Sept. 2005 was illegal as such a huge electric consumption is absurd for a domestic consumer. Appellant paid the said amount of Rs.12104/- on protest and claimed for refund from WBSEDCL, Adra Purulia for the same amount as it is an excess payment. Mr. Uttam Kumar Chakraborty also contended that demand of Rs. 33,431.68/- towards LPSC should not be imposed as payment of Rs. 12104/- was an excess payment. Mr Chakraborty Ld. Advocate also prayed for direction to OP not to disconnect the electric line of appellant.
In written version submitted by OP it is contended that it is not correct that the bill generated from 28.06.2005 to 27.03.2007. Actually, the bill was generated on the reading date 28.02.2005 and bill period July 2005 to Sept. 2005 amounting to Rs. 12104/- where consumption was found 4306 units. On supervisory metre reading on 28.06.2005 it was 13709 on 31.03.2005 resulting a difference of 4306 units. The said metre reading is a case of accumulation. So 21 months slab benefit was given to the bill.
The OP also argued that from the beginning of installation it was a 05 digits metre not 04 digits as claimed by appellant and there was no dispute in the bill for the period of July 2005 to Sept. 2005 and there was no mistake of reading taken from old 05 digits metre. OP also contended that it is essentially a billing dispute and the consumer will not get any relief without availing the Forum enunciated in the Regulation under WBERC and Chief Electrical Inspector is the only competent person to decide such type of billing dispute. Neither Court nor Consumer Fora is competent to give any benefit/relief to the consumer. Hence, the present case should be dismissed. OP submitted citations relevant to the instant case.
We have gone through the materials on record and considered the submission advanced by the Ld. Advocates appearing for the respective parties.
It is true that appellant is a resident of village- Palashkala, Kashimpur Road, Adra, Post & P.S. – Adra , Purulia, Pin – 723121 is a consumer having Consumer ID No. 242017918 and Domestic Consumer No. 720023 under Station Manager, Adra, WBSEDCL, Purulia. The trouble arises when the appellant received the electric bill from OP on 11.04.2007. for the period 28.06.2005 to 27.03.2017 where outstanding amount Rs. 12104/- and stop metre were shown. Complainant informed several times to Station Superintendent, WBSEB, Adra, Supply Station for revised bill so that alleged outstanding amount of Rs. 12104/- is waived up. As per record OP did not respond at all.
However, appellant paid the outstanding amount of Rs. 12104/- on 09.03.2017 and received quarterly spot Bill dated 25.09.2018 for the bill period October 2018 to December 2018 where outstanding demand to the tune of Rs. 33,431.68/- is mentioned as LPSC.
Appellant filed photocopies of several money receipts paid time to time for payment of bill period from April 2007 to June 2018 before this Commission.
Going through all pros and cons of the case and materials on record, we are of the opinion that this is essentially a case of billing dispute where the metre readings and corresponding bill amount and payment are involved.
Before going to the final observation, it will very much relevant to recall the Clause 3.5 of Notification No. 55 of West Bengal Electricity Regulatory Commission published in Kolkata Gazette (Extra-ordinary) dated 7th August, 2013 which derived its force from the Electricity Act, 2003, which stands as -
“3.5. 1(a) – In case, there is any dispute in respect of the billed amount, the consumer may lodge a complaint with the Grievance Redressal Officer or the Central Grievance Redressal Officer of the license and thereafter to the Ombudsman in appeal against the order of the Grievance Redressal Officer or the Central Grievance Redressal Officer, in accordance with the provisions of the concerned Regulations…….”
The above mentioned provisions of Clause 3.5 of Notification No. 55/WBERC dt. 07.08.2013 must have a statutory force. If law permits specific procedure for some specific disputes, it should be done in accordance with the object of the legislature and no Court/Forum is empowered to bypass such legislative command.
This instant appeal case does not come under the purview of ‘unfair trade practices’ or ‘restrictive trade practices’ or deficiency in service as enumerated in Section 2(1)(d)(ii) of C.P. act, 1986.
It is not possible by this Commission to ascertain whether the metre was 04 (four) digits or 05 (five) digits depending only on oral or documentary evidence without the opinion of any technical expert. Appellant did not pray for any technical expert/person to verify his claim. So appellant should have invoked Clause 3.5 of Notification No. 55 of WBERC by lodging Complaint before the appropriate authority.
In result, the appeal not being in conformity with the provision of the law, merits no success.
Hence,
Ordered
The instant Appeal being No . A/14/2018 is dismissed on contest.
Consequently CC/06/2018 is dismissed being not maintainable in Consumer Fora.
We make no order as to cost.
