LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
Punjab State Electricity Board Buta Singh (aged 35 years) son of Karnail Singh, resident of Khosa Pando, Distt.Moga.
Complainant
Versus
1. Punjab State Electricity Board, service be got effected through its Secretary, PSEB, Patiala.
2. XEN, Punjab State Electricity Board, Zira.
3. Sub Divisional Officer, Punjab State Electricity Board, North Sub Division, Moga.
Opposite parties.
Sh.Buta Singh complainant has filed the present complaint under section 12 of The Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (herein-after referred to as ‘Act’) against Punjab State Electricity Board through its Secretary, PSEB, Patiala and others (herein-after referred to as ‘Board’)-opposite parties directing them to quash the illegal demand of Rs.41923/- raised vide memo no. 2685 dated 26.11.2008, to restore the electric supply of his connection and also to pay Rs.10000/- as compensation for causing mental tension and harassment beside costs of litigation or any other relief to which this Forum may deem fit be granted.
2. Briefly stated, Sh.Buta Singh complainant is a ‘consumer’ of the OPs-Board having domestic electric connection bearing account no. KH37/0759 installed at his residential premises having sanctioned load of 0.06 KW. That the complainant belongs to Mazbhi Sikh caste which has been declared as ‘Schedule Caste’ in Punjab State and they are exempted from the payment of electricity charges. So he was not liable to pay any consumption charges. That the complainant received a memo dated 26.11.2008 from the OPs-Board vide which they raised a demand of Rs.41923/- on account of ‘theft of energy’. That the impugned demand raised by the OPs-Board is altogether illegal, unjust void at law on the ground that the complainant is exempted from payment of electricity charges and there was no necessity for him to steal the electricity.
That under the garb of aforesaid allegations of stealing the electricity, the OPs-Board has disconnected his electric supply forcibly, illegally and in violation of rules and regulations of the PSEB. That the complainant approached the office of OPs-Board number of times and requested to withdraw the impugned demand, but to no effect. That the aforesaid act and conduct of the OPs-Board has caused great inconvenience, harassment and mental agony to him for which he has claimed Rs.10000/- as compensation beside costs of the litigation. Hence the present complaint.
3. Notice of the complaint was given to the OPs-Board, who appeared through Sh.S.K.Dhir Advocate and filed written reply contesting the same. They took up preliminary objections that the complaint is not maintainable in the present form; that there is no deficiency in service on the part of the OPs-Board; that the complainant has concealed the material facts from the knowledge of this Forum. Originally, there was one connection bearing account no.K37/759 installed in the name of complainant, but the same was permanently disconnected on 7.12.2005 on account of non payment of consumption charges. In fact on 14.11.2008 Sh.Jagtar Singh, AAE PSEB Sub Urban Division, Moga alongwith other officials of the OPs-Board checked the residential premises of the complainant and found him stealing the electricity by illegal means i.e. by fixing the direct wire from main PVC. That the checking authority declared it as a case of ‘theft of energy’. That the checking was conducted in the presence of the complainant, but he refused to sign the checking report.
Thereafter, notice no.2684 dated 26.11.2008 under section 126 of Electricity Act, 2003 was issued to the complainant demanding Rs.41923/- on account of ‘theft of energy’. He was also asked to file the objections, if any, within 7 days, but he neither filed any objection nor deposited the impugned amount. On merits, the OPs-Board took up the same and similar pleas as taken up by them in the preliminary objections. All other allegations contained in the complaint were specifically denied being wrong and incorrect. Hence, it was prayed that the complaint filed by the complainant has no merit and it deserves dismissal.
4. In order to prove his case, the complainant tendered in evidence his affidavit Ex.A1, copy of bill Ex.A2, copy of caste certificate Ex.A3, copy of notice Ex.A4 and closed his evidence.
5. To rebut the evidence of the complainant, the OPs-Board tendered in evidence affidavit Ex.R1 of Sh.D.S.Toor XEN, affidavit Ex.R2 of Jagtar Singh AAE, copy of notice Ex.R3, copy of report Ex.R4, copy of checking register Ex.R5 and closed their evidence.
6. We have heard the arguments of Sh.D.K.Garg ld. counsel for the complainant and Sh.S.K.Dhir ld.counsel for the OPs-Board and have very carefully perused the evidence on the file.
7. Sh.S.K.Dhir, ld.counsel for the OPs-Board has mainly argued that the complainant is not a ‘consumer’ of the OPs-Board. This contention of the ld.counsel for the OPs-Board has full force. Admittedly, Buta Singh had obtained domestic electric connection bearing account no. KH37/0759 for his residence having sanctioned load of 0.06 KW. His connection was permanently disconnected on 7.12.2005 on account of non payment of consumption charges. After the expiry of two years of PDCO (Permanent Disconnection Order), old connection can not be revived by any authority of the OPs-Board. In that event, Buta Singh complainant having no connection in his name can not be said to be a ‘consumer’ of the OPs-Board.
8. Moreover, the evidence on the file proves that on 14.11.2008 Sh.Jagtar Singh, AAE PSEB Sub Urban Division, Moga alongwith other officials of the OPs-Board checked the residential premises of the complainant and found him stealing the electricity by illegal means i.e. by fixing the direct wire from main PVC. The checking authority declared it as a case of ‘theft of energy’. The checking was conducted in the presence of the complainant, but he refused to sign the checking report. Thereafter, notice no.2684 dated 26.11.2008 under section 126 of Electricity Act, 2003 was issued to the complainant demanding Rs.41923/- on account of ‘theft of energy’. The charge of theft has been proved from the checking report Ex.R4 and affidavit Ex.R1 of Sh. D.S.Toor XEN, affidavit Ex.R2 of Jagtar Singh AAE, copy of notice Ex.R3, copy of checking register Ex.R5.
9. On the other hand, the complainant has failed to lead any cogent and convincing evidence to prove that he was not committing direct ‘theft of electricity’ except his own affidavit Ex.A1. There is no corroboration to his affidavit that he was not stealing the electricity by illegal means. Moreover, he has reason to give false affidavit in order to save himself from the consequences of being caught red handed while committing theft of electricity. Thus, no reliance could be placed on the affidavit Ex.A1 of the complainant and we discard the same.
10. Moreover, the checking party had acted in accordance with rules and regulations issued by PSEB from time to time and in discharge of their official duties. They were supposed to do all their acts bonafidely and in good faith and without any malice or motive. The complainant has not alleged any ill-will or animus against them. They have no reason to make a wrong report against him. In view of these circumstances, we hold that on 30.05.2008 the complainant was found stealing the electricity by aforesaid illegal means. Thus, the impugned demand of Rs.41923/- raised by the OPs-Board on account of ‘theft of energy’ was quite legal and valid and as per rules and instructions of the PSEB. Hence, the complainant has failed to prove if there was any deficiency of service on the part of the OPs-Board.
11. The ld.counsel for the parties did not urge or argue any other point before us.
12. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the complaint filed by the complainant has no merit and the same is dismissed. In view of the peculiar circumstances of the case, the parties are left to bear their own costs. Copies of the order shall be sent to the parties free of cost and thereafter, the file be consigned to the record room.
Submit Complaint..
