Orissa

Jajapur

CC/43/2020

Jagabandhu Roul. - Complainant(s)

Versus

Electrical S.D.O,Jajpur. - Opp.Party(s)

Srinibas Pati

29 Oct 2021

ORDER

                                                                  

                IN THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, JAJPUR.

                                                        Present:      1.Shri Pitabas Mohanty, Member

                                                                             2. Miss Smita  Ray, Member,(w)                                  

                                                   Dated the 29th day of October,2021.

                                                      C.C.Case No.  43  of 2020

Jagabandhu Roul   , S/O Late Mukunda ch.Roul   

At.  Khandara  , P.O.Mirchandapur 

P.S/  Dist.Jajpur.                                                                                                                    …………….    .Complainant .                                                                        

                          (Versus)

1.Electrical S.D.O,Jajpur  ,At/P.O/Dist .Jajpur .    

2.  Junior Engineer, Electrical , Jajpur  At/P.O/  Dist. Jajpur.

                                                                                                                                                           ………………..Opp.Party.                                                                                                                                                                                                              

For the Complainant:                  Sri Srinibas  Pati ,  Advocate 

For the Opp.Parties   :                 Sri P.K.Daspattnaik, Advocate.

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     Date Date of order:  29. 10. 2021.

MISS SMITA  RAY,   M E M B E R (W)   .

                The petitioner has filed the present dispute  alleging deficiency   in service on the part of the O.Ps .

                The facts as stated by the petitioner in the complaint petition shortly are that the petitioner r is inhabitant of village - khandra , P.O. Mirchandapur , P.S/ Dist.Jajpur  he is domestic consumer vide consumer no.JTR 1651.

Since last 20 years  he  is paying  the electricity  dues regularly. That in the month of March-20 he received an arrear outstanding bill    from  O.P.no.1 S.D.O, Electrical ,Jajpur   that he had no electricity dues .Thereafter the petitioner approached the concerned S.D.O, Electrical Section-1, Jajpur  ,Executive engineer, Electrical ,Jajpur  with a written application in what circumstances he shall pay a heavy outstanding amount of arrear but the S.D.O, Electrical (O.P.no.1)  did not respond the grievance of the petitioner and told him he pay the arrear amount other wise his electric supply will be dis- connected  .

                If the power supply  is disconnected  from  the house of the petitioner  he will  suffer irreparable loss for wrong billing and negligence of op.1 and 2 .This attitude of  O.P harassed  the petitioner ,since  the petitioner has  paid the energy charges regularly .The o.ps illegally demanded a sum of Rs20,387/- where as no arrear  bill against the petitioner.

                Accordingly  finding no other alternative the petitioner  knocked  the door of this commission with the prayer to direct the  O.Ps  for  correction of excess billing which stands in  the name of the petitioner  and other relief  the commission may be awarded .

                After  receipt of notice the o.p appeared through their learned advocate  and filed their  written version  stating  that the complaint petition is not maintainable  in the eye of law. The claim of the petitioner is barred by law of limitation. That all such allegation made in the claim petition are all false and baseless, the petitioner is to proof his own case through proper documentary evidence. It is correct to say that a huge amount of arrear outstanding against the consumer.

                The petitioner  is a domestic consumer bearing consumer No.JTR-1651 under the O.P.no.2 ,Electrical section of Jajpur Town within Jajpur Electrical Sub-division. As per ledger copy available with the O.p the complainant consumer has an outstanding amount of Rs.20704.88 till January,2020. The petitioner is using power supply unauthorized exceeding  his contract demand of load. Hence after due verification of the spot and penalty was assessed and penalty amount of Rs.14984.00 had been credited in his consumer A/C on May,2013 .Respective bill showing the inclusion of penalty amount as well as billing amount was also hand over to the petitioner consumer in due course.

                There was spot verification in the house premises of the petitioner  by authorized officer of the O>p. The concern officer on the spot found that the petitioner availing power supply unauthorizedly exceeding his contract demand for which the petitioner was booked U/S 126 of Electricity Act. After due compliance of the statutory formalities penalty amount has been fixed to  him for the drawal of the excess power supply in his house premises. Unfortunately he  could not paid the penalty amount as yet , hence the amount had been reflected in the consumer’s ledger account.

                In the above state of affair the very claim made by the petitioner in  no circumstances is sustainable in the eye of law and liable to be dismissed.

On the date of date of hearing we heard the argument from the petitioner as well as  the advocate  for the o.ps

After perusal of the record, order sheet and ledger copy in details

1.It is undisputed   fact that the petitioner  is a domestic consumer under the o.p

 vide consumer no.JTR-1651

2. it is also undisputed  fact that there is an arrear amount against   the petitioner  as per disconnection notice issued by O.P.no.1  there is an amount for a sum of Rs20,387/ against  the petitioner.

3.The O.Ps taking in the stand in the written  version  that the petitioner    is using power supply unauthorizedly  exceeding his contract demand of load hence after due verification of the spot  the  penalty was assessed and penalty amount of Rs14984/-  had been credited in his  consumer account  in  May 2013  as  per Electricity Act,2003

4.The O.P also  taken  the stand in the written version  that the dispute is barred by law of limitation . In this point it is our considered view  that the o.p issued  disconnection notice  on 1.3.20 .Thereafter on 18.3.20 the petitioner filed the present dispute .Hence the dispute is within the period of limitation .On the other hand regarding the penality amount of Rs14,984/-  which  was assessed in May-13 .It is our considered view the billing cycle  of O.P come  under continue of cause of action. Besides this limitation point is a technical point as per observation of  Hon’ble M.P- 2004-vol-11 CLD-568-(M.P)Torence Correya Vrs Maruti Udyog Ltd

Thereafter after perusal  of  the order sheet  on dt.8.3.21 this commission directed the  O.Ps  to file details papers as per provision of U/S  126 of Electricity Act 2003, what procedure has been taken before final assessment of penalty  but the O.P  fails to file such documents .

Accordingly  we perused the  appex  court judgement 2013(3) CPR-670(SC) U.P Power corporation  Ltd, Vrs Anis Ahamed, wherein it is held that  in para

 46-  The Acts of indulgence in “ Unauthorized use of electricity” by a person as defined in clause (b) of the Explanation below section 126 of the Electricity Act,2003 neither has any relationship with “unfair trade practice” or “ deficiency” in service “ nor does it amounts to hazardous services by the licensee. Such acts of “ unauthorized use of electricity” has nothing to do with charging price in excess of the price. Therefore, acts of person indulging in  “ unauthorized  use of electricity” do not fall within the meaning of “complaint” as we have noticed above and, therefore, the “complaint” against assessment U/S 126 is not maintainable  before the Consumer Forum. The Commission has already noticed that the offers referred to in section 135 to 140 can be tried only by a special court constituted U/s  153 of the Electricity Act,2003. In that view of the matter also the complaint against any action taken U/S 135 to 140 of the Electricity Act 2003 is not maintainable before the Consumer Forum.

47(iii)

             The Electricity Act,2003 and the C.P.Act,1986 runs parallel for giving redressal to any person ,who falls within the meaning of “consumer “ U/S 2(1)(d) of C.P.Act,1986 or the Central Government of the State Government or association of consumer but it is limited to the dispute relating to unfair trade practice or a restrictive trade practice adopted by the service provider, or if the consumer

suffers from deficiency in service “ or” hazardous service” or the service provider has charged a price excess of the price fixed by or under any law “.

            On the above contest this commission has given several opportunity  to the o.ps for filing details documents regarding 126 of Electric Act 2003, but the o.ps did not choose to file the same  or any evidence to prove that such penalty was done by following proper procedure of law. The reason  behind  is best known to the  O.Ps .Hence this fora is empowered to entertain the present  dispute  U/S 126(3) of Electricity  Act.,2003. In view of the observation of Hon’ble National Commission  vide R.P.No.67/2010  decided on 1^st  june- 2015 ( Ashok Ojha Vrs Jhadkhanda  Electrcity Board and others)

                Under the above circumstances as observed above the stand taken by the O.Ps  that imposition of penalty U/S 126 (3) of Electricity Act,  2003 is not sustainable as per law . In view of the observation  of Hon’ble National Commission  mentioned above and the O.ps utterly fails to establish that this is a case of section 126(3) of Electricity  Act 2003 . Hence in our considered view that the  O.Ps have committed patent deficiency of service  in assessing the penalty U/S 126(3)  of Electricity  Act,2003 for which a common man like the petitioner  has been harassed which is not permissible in a  soverign  democratic welfare  society , for which the petitioner suffered mental agony . As such to meet the ends of justice we allow  the dispute.

Hence this order

Without taking any adverse inference we quashed the penalty of Rs.14,984/- which has been credited  in the petitioner consumer A/C No. on May-2013  U/S 126(3)  of Electricity  Act,2003 as per observation  of Hon ble National Commission  reported above. The O.Ps  are directed to  deducted the penalty amount from the ledger of the petitioner within one month after receipt of this order, failing which the petitioner can take step as per law.

This order is pronounced in the open Forum on this the 29th  day of October,  2021 under my hand and seal of the commission.