Punjab

Faridkot

CC/19/158

Devinder Kumar - Complainant(s)

Versus

Assistant Executive Engineer - Opp.Party(s)

Ashu Mittal

03 Mar 2020

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, FARIDKOT

 

                                                    Complaint No :          158 of 2019

Date of Institution :      27.06.2019

Date of Decision :        03.03.2020

Devinder Kumar aged about 40 years s/o Roshan Lal r/o Street No.3, Balbir Basti, Faridkot Tehsil and District Faridkot.

                                                             ...Complainant

Versus

1. Assistant Executive Engineer, Punjab State Power Corporation, City Sub Division, Faridkot.    
2. Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd., The Mall, Patiala through its Chairman cum Managing Director.

                                   .........Ops

Complaint under Section 12 of the

Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

 

Quorum: Sh Ajit Aggarwal, President,

              Smt Param Pal Kaur, Member.

 

Present: Sh Ashu Mittal, Ld Counsel for complainant,

    Sh Mohan Singh Brar, Ld Counsel for OPs.   

ORDER

(Ajit Aggarwal, President)

 

cc no.-158 of 2019

                                           Complainant has filed the present complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 against Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd etc/Ops seeking directions to Ops to withdraw the demand of Rs.12,520/- raised vide bill dt 03.01.2019 and for further directing them to pay Rs.50,000/- as compensation for harassment and mental agony suffered by complainant besides litigation expenses to complainant.

2                                     Briefly stated, the case of the complainant is that he is having domestic supply electric connection bearing a/c no. 3000435854 and meter is installed outside his premises. It is submitted that for last ten months, meter of complainant was running very fast and in December, 2018, he moved an application regarding improper working of meter and on his request, his meter was inspected, but they did not give any satisfactory reply. He received bill dated 3.01.2019 for Rs.12,520/- and on receiving the same, complainant deposited requisite fees of Rs.120/-for changing his meter. Meter of complainant was changed by OPs but Ops did not issue bill for month of March, 2019 and then, complainant received bill dated 5.05.2019 for Rs.21,100/-. Thereafter, complainant

cc no.-158 of 2019

approached OPs and requested them to get deposited the bill after deducting bill amount charged in bill dated 3.01.2019, but OPs refused to accept his genuine request and threatened to disconnect his connection if he fails to pay the entire amount in time. Complainant made several requests to Ops to withdraw the demand for excessive charges, but they refused to accede to his requests and this act and conduct of Ops has caused great inconvenience, harassment and mental tension to complainant for which he has prayed for seeking directions to OPs to set aside the demand of Rs.12,520/-raised vide bill dt 3.01.2019 and for further directing them to pay Rs.50,000/- as compensation for harassment and mental agony suffered by complainant besides litigation expenses to complainant. Hence, this complaint.

3                         Counsel for complainant was heard with regard to admission of the complaint and vide order dt 01.07.2019, complaint was admitted and notice was ordered to be issued to the opposite parties.

4                              On receipt of the notice, the opposite parties filed written statement wherein they have denied all the allegations

cc no.-158 of 2019

levelled by complainant being wrong and incorrect and it is admitted that complainant moved an application for checking the meter. On his request meter of complainant was checked by concerned JE on 17.12.2018 and he gave report that meter of complainant was working on earth and thus, bill dt 3.01.2019 for Rs.12,440/-and not for 12,520/-was issued showing old reading on28.10.2018 of 42805 units and new reading of 44305 units taken on 3.01.2019. It is also admitted that meter of complainant was changed on 16.01.2019 and old meter reading was 44541 units. Bill dated 9.03.2019 was issued showing old reading 1538 and new 1873 consumption 335 units. Old meter was removed at 44541-236 units the difference of old reading 44305 and 44541-236 units was also charged and bill was issued for Rs.17,560/-. Bill dated 5.05.2019 was issued for 21,290/- for 425 units showing old reading of 1873 units and new reading of 2298 units. Amount is charged as per consumption and as per rules and regulations of OPs and it is due towards complainant and he is liable to pay the same. Complainant is not entitled to any compensation or relief as sought by him. It is reiterated that there is no deficiency in service on the part of answering OPs. All the other allegations and

cc no.-158 of 2019

allegation with regard to relief sought too were refuted with a prayer that complaint deserves to be dismissed with costs.

5                             Parties were given proper opportunities to produce evidence to prove their respective case. Counsel for complainant tendered in evidence affidavit of complainant Ex.C-1 and documents Ex C-2 to 4 and closed the same.

6                               In order to rebut the evidence of the complainant, the opposite parties tendered in evidence affidavit of Gaurav Kakkar as Ex OP-1 and documents Ex OP-2 to OP-11 and closed the evidence.

7                          We have heard the ld counsel for complainant as well as Ops and have carefully gone through the evidence produced on file.

8                            From the careful perusal of record and evidence and documents produced by respective parties, it is observed that case of complainant is that he is having domestic supply electric connection installed outside his house. Meter of complainant was running very fast for last ten months and he gave representation

cc no.-158 of 2019

regarding this to OPs but they did not do anything. He received bill dated 3.01.2019 for Rs.12,520/- and on receiving the same, he requested for changing the meter and on his request, OPs Changed his meter and thereafter, they sent bill dated 5.05.2019 for Rs.21,100/-. Complainant approached OPs and made several requests to them to get deposited the bill after deducting bill dated 3.01.2019, but OPs refused to accept his genuine request, rather threatened to disconnect his connection if he fails to pay the entire amount in time. All this amounts to deficiency in service. In reply, OPs admitted that complainant moved an application for checking of his meter and it is also admitted that on his request, they changed his meter on 16.01.2019. As per OPs, bill dt 3.01.2019 for Rs.12,440/- was issued with old reading of 42805 units and new reading of 44305 units. After change of meter, bill dated 9.03.2019 was issued showing old reading 1538 and new 1873 consumption 335 units. Old meter was removed at 44541-236 units the difference of old reading 44305 and 44541-236 units was also charged and bill was issued for Rs.17,560/-. Bill dated 5.05.2019 was issued for 21,290/- for 425 units showing old reading of 1873 units and new reading of 2298 units. Amount is

cc no.-158 of 2019

charged as per rules and regulations of OPs and complainant is liable to pay the same. There is no deficiency in service on the part of OPs and prayed for dismissal of complaint.

9                     Now, it is admitted case of the parties that complainant is consumer of OPs having electric connection in question. It is further admitted that Ops issued bill dated 3.01.2019 for Rs.12,440/- for 1500 units, bill dated 9.03.2019 for Rs.17,560/-for 570 units including amount of bill dated 03.01.2019 and they issued bill dated 5.05.2019 for Rs.21,290/-for 425 units. Reason put forward by Ops that they charged this amount as per rules does not seem appropriate. Bill dated 3.01.2019 Ex C-3 itself clears the point that this bill is for Rs.12,520/-and not for Rs.12,440/-as alleged by Ops and this bill was issued on the basis of consumption of 1500 units i.e 44305 of old reading and 42805 of new reading. Meter was already challenged by complainant vide application dated 11.12.2018 and bill dated 3.01.2019 contains excessive consumption reading than the usual consumption of the complainant. Ld counsel for complainant has brought our attention towards document Ex C-4, which is copy of bill dated 5.05.2019 that clearly indicates the fact that current

cc no.-158 of 2019

consumption reading of his meter was 425 units, but amount charged for reading of more than 1500 units shown by OPs in bill dated 03.01.2019, is not justifiable. Moreover, no checking report is placed on record by OPs. Careful perusal of these documents reveal that average power consumption reading of meter of complainant is not more than 350-450 units, but reading of units 1500 recorded in bill dated 3.01.2019 is highly excessive, which does not seem appropriate. So, it is cleared that the meter in question was not recording correct consumption. As per the rules and regulations if there is any defect in the electric meter and not recording consumption than the consumption shall be charged on the basis of average of last year.  The relevant regulations of PSPCL given in section 21.04 (g) (ii) of Electricity Supply Code and Related Matters Regulations 2007 vide notification no.PSERC/Secy/Regu.31 dated June, 29, 2007 are reproduced as hereunder:

                  “The account of a consumer will be overhauled for the period a defective meter remained at site and for the period of direct

supply, on the basis of energy consumption of the corresponding period of the previous year after calibrating for the changes in load, if

cc no.-158 of 2019

 

any. In case the average consumption for the corresponding period of previous year is not available then, the consumer will be tentatively billed for the consumption to be assessed in the manner indicted in para-4 of Annexure-8 and subsequently adjusted on the basis of actual consumption in the corresponding period of the previous/succeeding year.

10                           In the instant case, the average consumption for the corresponding period of the previous year must be available with the Ops, so in view of aforementioned section 21.4 (g) ( ii) of Electricity Supply Code and Related Matters Regulations 2007, the consumer will be tentatively billed for the consumption to be assessed in the manner indicated in Para-4 of Annexure-8 and subsequently adjusted on the basis of actual consumption in the corresponding period of previous year.

11                             In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the complaint filed by the complainant is accepted and the demand raised by Ops from complainant vide bill  dated 3.01.2019 is set aside  and quashed. However, the Ops are at liberty to charge the complainant for the disputed period by overhauling his account on the

cc no.-158 of 2019

 

basis of average consumption in the corresponding period of the  previous year. Ops are further directed to adjust the amount of Rs.12,000/- deposited by complainant in compliance of order dated 01.07.2019 passed by this Forum in subsequent bills. Compliance of this order be made within one month of receipt of the copy of the order, failing which complainant shall be entitled to proceed under Section 25 and 27 of the Consumer Protection Act. Copy of order be supplied to parties free of cost. File be consigned to record room.

Announced in Open Forum

Dated : 03.03.2020

 

                              (Param Pal Kaur)                     (Ajit Aggarwal)

   Member                                  President