FIRST APPEAL NO. 1696 OF 2005

IN COMPLAINT CASE NO. 122 OF 2005

DISTRICT CONSUMER FORUM: AHMEDNAGAR.

1. The Executive Engineer,

MSEB Sheogaon,

District, Ahmednagar.

2. Engineer, MSEB (Rural)

Ahmednagr, through

Shri. Pradip Radheshyam Sawant,

Flying Squad, Ahmednagar.


3. Shri. Eknath Narayan Kalambe

Wireman, Ghotan Tal. Sheogaon,

Dist. Ahmednagar. … Appellants

VERSUS

Shri. Shivaji Bandu Kshirsagar

R/o. Ghotan, Tal. Sheogaon,

Dist. Ahmednagar. … Respondent

Coram : Shri.S.G.Deshmukh, Hon`ble Presiding Judicial Member.

Mrs. Uma S.Bora, Hon`ble Member.

Present: Adv. Smt. Smita Medhekar for appellant.

Adv. Shri. Ganesh Patunkar, for respondent.

:: ORAL ORDER::
Per Mrs. Uma S. Bora, Hon`ble Member

1. Executive Engineer, M.S.E.B. Ahmednagar and others challenges in this appeal order passed by District Consumer Forum in complaint case No. 122/2005 dated 09.08.2005.

2. Facts giving rise to this appeal are as under:-

Complainant Shivaji Bandu Kshirsagar resident of Ghotan, Taluka Shevgaon is running tyre repairing workshop. His consumer number is 140150004209. He is regular payee of electricity bills from year 2000. On 09.08.2004 and 10.08.2004 some officers and lineman of MSEB came to his workshop. Conducted alleged panchnama, and disconnected the supply and removed meter without giving any intimation to him. On 12.08.2004 he received bill of Rs.87,000/-. Again on 22.12.2004 he received bill of Rs.33,045/- for the theft of electricity. Therefore, he approached to District Forum praying for reconnection of the electricity supply and demanding compensation.



3. Appellant appeared before District Forum and resisted the claim. It is submitted that on 09.08.2004 flying squad of appellant inspected the workshop and found that connection was taken directly from service line. While conducting the panchanama complainant gathered mob therefore panchanama could not be completed and on 12.08.2004 bill of theft was issued to the complainant and criminal case was also filed against the complainant/respondent.



4. After hearing both the parties Forum cancelled the bill dated 12.08.2004 and 22.12.2004 and directed appellant to issue the bill for 2 HP load for six months. District Forum also directed the appellant to modify penal charges of Rs.50,000/- to 20,000/-. District Forum also directed to start the supply of electricity within 8 days. District Forum also awarded Rs.1,000/- for compensation and Rs.1,000/- as cost.

5. Being aggrieved by the said judgment and order MSEB came in appeal.

6. Notices were issued to both the parties. Adv. Smt. Smita Medhekar for appellant and Adv. Shri. Ganesh Patunkar appeared for respondent. Adv. Medhekar submitted that the flying squad inspected the workshop of complainant and found that ‘connections to T.C. are wrong. Meter is after cutout and direct use of electricity.’ She submitted that, panchanama is also conducted in the presence of complainant but complainant did not sign the panchanama. She submitted that as the respondent committed theft of electricity, bill of electricity and penal charges of Rs. 50,000/- were charged as per provisions of Electricity Act. District Forum committed error in reducing the penal charges to the tune of Rs. 20,000/- instead of Rs.50,000/-. Adv. Medhekar further submitted that, the bills were issued to the complainant after assessing the consumption and taking the meter reading. As the complainant found tampering the meter bills were charged as per theft assessment and accordingly issued. There is no illegality committed by the appellant while assessing the bills.

7. Adv. Ganesh Patunkar submitted that, respondent is a resident of small village, running a workshop. His regular bill used to be Rs.53/- in average. Bill of June-2004 was on record which shows that the charges of electricity are Rs.530/-. He submitted that one officer of appellant company visited the workshop and asked the appellant about checking of meter, he replied that electricity was not on; therefore, meter can not be checked. Dissatisfied of this reply of complainant, officer of MSEB came on second day and disconnected the supply. He submitted that even panchanama of the spot is not bearing the signature of complainant. He further submitted that for checking of tampering of meter, the meter should have been sent for the testing. But without following the procedure appellant issued bill of huge amount Rs.87,850/-. Again on 22.12.2004 bill of Rs.33,045/- was issued by the appellant. He further submitted that District Forum also did not consider the factual aspect. He submitted that as per order of District Forum respondent paid the penal charges of Rs.20,000/- to the appellant.

8. We heard the argument of both the parties and perused the record. As per its order District Forum directed the appellant MSEB to cancel the bills and instead of said bill issue fresh bills as per holding consumption of consumer as 2 HP. It is not known on what basis the Forum issued said directions. It is also held by Forum that said consumption of 2 HP should be held for last six months. This finding also recorded without any basis. Dist. Forum further directed appellant to recover Rs.20,000/- as penal charges instead of Rs.50,000/-. This order is issued by Dist. Forum holding that complainant had committed theft. If complainant is liable for theft then on what ground Dist. Forum reduced the penal charges. In our view, officers of MSEB did not produce affidavit of any officer who was party to the flying squad. MSEB did not follow the procedure of inspection of the spot or panchanama. We are therefore willing to remand the matter to the Dist. Forum to decide the complaint afresh on merit. Dist. Forum is to decide the matter by affording opportunities to both the parties to adduce the evidence in respect of their grievance. We are directing both the parties to appear before the District Forum. Hence, the order.

- O R D E R -

1. Appeal is allowed.

2. The judgment and order of Dist. Forum is hereby quashed and set aside.

3. Matter is remanded to the Dist. Forum for deciding afresh by giving an opportunity to both the parties to lead their evidence, if any.

4. Parties to appear before the Forum on 31.03.2010.

5. Copy of order be furnished to the parties.