DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, BARNALA, PUNJAB. 

Complaint Case No : CC/118/2022

Date of Institution : 07.04.2022

Date of Decision : 14.07.2023

Krishan Kumar aged about 52 years, son of Sh. Bachan Ram r/o Village Sahina, Tehsil and District Barnala now residing at Shakti Nagar, Ward No. 28, Barnala, District Barnala. 

                   …Complainant

Versus

1. Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd., Sub Urban Division, Barnala, District Barnala through its SDO/AEE.

2. Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd., City Division, Barnala through its XEN. 

3. Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd., The Mall Patiala, District Patiala through its Chairman.   

                …Opposite Parties

Complaint Under Consumer Protection Act, 2019.

Present: Sh. Ramandeep Rajput counsel for complainant.

Sh. SK Kotia counsel for opposite parties.

Quorum:-

1. Sh. Jot Naranjan Singh Gill : President

2.Smt Urmila Kumari : Member

3.Sh. Navdeep Kumar Garg : Member

(ORDER BY URMILA KUMARI MEMBER):

    The complainant namely Krishan Kumar has filed the present complaint under the Consumer Protection Act 2019, (amended upto date) against Punjab State Power Corporation Limited & others (hereinafter referred as opposite parties).  

2. The facts leading to the present complaint are that the complainant is consumer of the opposite parties having an electricity supply connection of one KW only under NRS category for his small cloths ironing shop situated at Handiaya under old Account No. L61MB740363W and new Account No. 30001686292 and regularly paying the electricity bills. The shop has been running by the complainant for earning his livelihood by means of self employment. 

3. It is further alleged that the electricity meter of the complainant has been installed in the public street outside the shop of the complainant. In the first week of November 2021 the complainant has been called upon by the opposite party No. 1 and got received the copy of letter No. 1946 dated 13.10.2021 and took the signatures on some blank forms. It has been alleged in the letter that the meter No. 1632178 was changed on 25.8.2021 which was checked at ME Lab Sangrur vide challan No. 175 dated 29.9.2021. As per checked meter reading was recorded as 32751 whereas billing has been made up to reading 18373 so there is no billing of 14378 units and the amount of these units comes to Rs. 1,25,161/- which will be deposited within 15 days failing which the action will be taken as per rules of PSPCL. The said letter issued by the opposite parties with the checking in the ME Lab and the alleged reading 32751 and the alleged amount of Rs. 1,25,161/- is illegal and against the rules and regulations and not binding upon the complainant. The said checking in the ME Lab was not done in the presence of the complainant or any of his representative. No notice was ever been served upon the complainant to keep him present at the time of alleged checking in the ME Lab. The meter has not been replaced in the presence of complainant or any of his representative. The copy of MCO vide which meter has been replaced has not been supplied to the complainant. The meter has not been packed and sealed in the presence of the complainant or his representative. No opportunity of heard has been given to the complainant. So, the opposite parties failed to adopt the proper procedure as per rules and regulations. It has been mentioned in the letter No. 1946 dated 13.10.2021 that the old meter No. 1632178 has been replaced on 25.8.2021 and a bill has been issued on 25.8.2021 for a periond from 2.8.2021 to 25.8.2021 on average basis of 85 units depicts that the meter status as D which means that meter is out of order. Further bills have been issued of new installed meter as Meter Status O which means meter is OK. The previous bill dated 2.8.2021 for the period from 1.6.2021 to 2.8.2021 on average basis of 325 units depicts that the meter status as D. The complainant has deposited all the payments of electricity bills including the above mentioned bills issued on average basis. The average consumption of old meter is calculated approximately between 100 to 150 units which is clearly proved by previously issued electricity bills. But letter dated 13.10.2021 has been issued for  reading 32751 with consumption of 14378 units and alleged assessment of Rs. 1,25,161/- which is against the rules of the PSPCL. The complainant has been leading his life by daily earning and cannot deposit the said bill of huge amount. The complainant has approached the opposite parties a number of times with a request to take back the said notice but the opposite parties did not listen the complainant and bent upon to disconnect the electricity supply connection which is deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on their part. Hence, the present complaint is filed for seeking the following reliefs.- 

i)that the said letter No. 1946 dated 13.10.2021 may be declared as illegal, null and void and against the rules and regulations. 

ii)The opposite parties be directed to withdraw the said letter No. 1946 dated 13.10.2021 which is against the rules and regulations. 

iii)To pay compensation of Rs. 50,000/- on account of physical and mental harassment. 

iv)To pay Rs. 10,000/- as litigation expenses. 

v)Any other relief, which the Hon’ble Commission deems fit. 

4. Upon notice of this complaint the opposite parties appeared and filed written version by taking preliminary objections interalia on the grounds that the amount demanded by the opposite parties is only remaining consumption charges as per reading taken from the meter at the time of checking of ME Lab. The present complaint is not maintainable and bad for misjoinder of necessary parties. The complainants have not filed the complaint with clean hands. 

5. On merits, it is admitted that the complainant is consumer of the opposite parties and having electricity connection of one KW only under NRS category for his shop situated at Handiaya under old Account No. L61MB740363W and New Account No. 30001686292 and has been consuming the electricity. It is submitted that the meter of the consumer was replaced as per instructions of PSPCL with new one on 26.8.2021. The old meter No. 1632178 and new meter No. A0434802 installed in the presence of Krishan Kumar consumer but the reading of old meter was not visible. As per rules of PSPCL the said meter was sent to ME Lab for returning the challan No. 175 dated 29.9.2021 through JE Shubham Garg and after inspecting the reading of the meter was returned to the concerned JE with the ME Lab at Sr. No. 10 of the above said challan that as per last reading billing must be done. Meter was sealed packed and handed over to concerned JE after mentioning PS No. 058673. On receipt of said meter as per rules of PSPCL notice Memo No. 1946 dated 13.10.2021 was served upon the consumer that the meter No. 1632178 was changed on 25.8.2021 which was checked at ME Lab Sangrur vide challan No. 175 dated 29.9.2021. As per checked meter reading was recorded as 32751 whereas billing has been made up to reading 18373 so there is no billing of 14378 units and the amount of these units comes to Rs. 1,25,161/- (SOP Rs. 1,04,307/-, ED Rs. 13,560/-, IDF Rs. 5,216/- and Municipal Tax Rs. 2078/-)  which will be deposited within 15 days failing which the action will be taken as per rules of PSPCL. But after the receipt of this letter complainant has not deposited the said amount which is demanded by the PSPCL for remaining consumption charges not for any theft of energy etc. It is further alleged that as the meter was not packed there was no need for checking of meter either in the presence of the complainant or any of his representative. Rest of the averments of the complaint are denied by the opposite parties. The opposite parties demanded only consumption charges not for any other charges so the complainant is bound to pay the same. The opposite parties are doing their best to resolve the issue and on the request of the complainant the case of the complainant has been admitted in DSC of the opposite parties but complainant is not serious to settle the issue and not paid 20% of the amount of the raised bill/notice as per conditions of DSC for adjudicating the matter. The other allegations of the complainant are denied. As such, there is no deficiency in service on their part and prayed for the dismissal of complaint.  

6. In support of his complaint, the complainant tendered into evidence copy of letter dated 13.10.2021 Ex.C-1, copies of bills Ex.C-2 to Ex.C-15, copies of receipts Ex.C-16 and Ex.C-17, copy of regulations  Ex.C-18, copy of job order of device replacement Ex.C-19, affidavit of Krishan Kumar Ex.C-20 and closed the evidence. Ld. Counsel for the complainant on 19.7.2022 has suffered the statement that he does not want to file any rejoinder.  

7. To rebut the case of the complainant, the opposite parties tendered into evidence affidavit of Pardeep Sharma Ex.O.P-1, copy of MCO Ex.O.P-2, copy of store challan Ex.O.P-3, copy of notice  Ex.O.P-4, copy of letter dated 25.10.2021 Ex.O.P-5, copy of letter dated 9.3.2022 Ex.O.P-6 and closed the evidence.    

9. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and gone through the record on the file. Written arguments filed by both the parties.  

10. The complainant has an electric connection bearing old account No. L61MB740363W and new account No. 30001686292 which is of NRS category for 1 KW load for a small scale ironing shop situated at Main Bazaar, Handiaya to earn his livelihood. He is consuming the electricity and depositing the bills regularly. In November 2021 the complainant received the notice No. 1946 dated 13.10.2021 issued by the opposite party No. 1 in which he was asked to deposit  amount of Rs. 1,25,161/- due to short billing of units. It is also mentioned in the above notice that the old meter No. 1632178 was replaced on 25.8.2021. This meter was checked in ME Lab Sangrur vide challan No. 175 dated 29.9.2021. During checking the reading of the meter was recorded as 32751 by ME Lab and the complainant had been billed only up to 18373 units. So the complainant has not been billed for 14378 units (32751-18373). So Rs. 1,25,161/- are payable by the complainant. This notice is challenged by the complainant. To prove his case the complainant has tendered into evidence various bills issued by the opposite parties. In the bills from Ex.C-2 to Ex.C-10 (time period 2.12.2019 to 1.6.2021) the status of the meter is shown “O” which means that the meter is OK and the readings are recorded as per actual consumption. In two bills Ex.C-11 and Ex.C-12 (time period 1.6.2021 to 25.8.2021) meter status is shown as “D” which means the meter is defective. The meter of the complainant was replaced with new meter on 25.8.2021 and the reading recorded by the new meter from 25.8.2021 to 30.9.2021 for 36 days is 524 units with meter status “O” Ex.C-13,  from 30.9.2021 to 2.12.2021 for 63 days is 503 units Ex.C-14 with meter status “O” and from 2.12.2021 to 15.2.2022 351 units for 75 days with meter status “O” Ex.C-15. 

11. On the other hand the opposite parties have admitted that the complainant is bonafide consumer of the opposite parties having electricity supply connection of 1 KW under NRS category. As per opposite parties the meter of the consumer was replaced as per PSPCL instructions with new one on 25.8.2021. The meter was replaced in the presence of Krishan Kumar the complainant. The reading of the old meter was not recorded at site as it was not visible. The meter was sent to ME Lab as per PSPCL rules vide challan No. 175 dated 29.9.2021 through JE Shubham Garg and after inspecting the reading of the meter the meter was returned to the concerned JE with the ME Lab at Sr. No. 10 of the above said challan with comment “make sure that billing is done according to reading recorded by the ME Lab.” The meter was seal packed with PS No. 058673 and handed over to the concerned JE.

12. From the above discussion it is ascertained that the meter remained defective from 1.6.2021 to 25.8.2021 i.e. for 86 days. As per Electricity Supply Code accuracy and reason/cause for defective meter should be recorded by the licensee at site up to 650 Volts and testing of the meter above 650 Volts should cover the entire metering system including CTs, VTs and is to be carried out in the laboratory which is not done by the licensee. After going through the contents of the complaint and various exhibits the Commission is of the view that the meter reading recorded by the ME Lab i.e. 32751 is not on the basis of actual consumption. It is of the defective meter which may be due to any cause. Moreover, consumption data of the complainant revealed that the consumption for 86 days during which the meter remained defective cannot be such high as per ME challan i.e. 18373 units (32751-14738) and the reading recorded in the ME Lab is of the defective meter which may be recorded due to defect in the meter and there is no explanatory note/findings recorded by ME Lab for this huge consumption. It shows deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the opposite parties. After replacement of the meter the consumption of the complainant is recorded maximum 14.5 units per days as per Ex.C-13. 

13. In view of the above discussion present complaint is partly allowed and the opposite parties are directed to withdraw the notice No. 1946 dated 13.10.2021 issued to the complainant. The billing of the complainant from 1.6.2021 to 25.8.2021 during the period the meter remained defective be charged on the basis of maximum reading recorded by the replaced new meter at the rate of 14.5 units per day i.e. 86 x 14.5 = 1247 units. Any amount deposited in advance by the complainant as per Ex.C-16 and Ex.C-17 be adjusted in the future bills. The opposite parties are also directed to pay Rs. 5,000/- as compensation for mental agony and harassment and Rs. 2,000/- as litigation expenses to the complainant. 

14. Compliance of the order be made within the period of 45 days from the receipt of copy of this order.  

15. Copy of this order be supplied to the parties free of costs as per rules. File be consigned to the records after its due compliance. 

ANNOUNCED IN THE OPEN COMMISSION:

       14th Day of July 2023

 

 

        (Jot Naranjan Singh Gill)

            President

 

(Urmila Kumari)

Member

 

(Navdeep Kumar Garg)

Member