DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION SAS NAGAR (MOHALI)
Consumer Complaint No. 775 of 2018
Date of institution: 25.07.2018 Date of decision : 21.06.2021
Raj Rani wife of Shri Surinder Kumar Sanghi, resident of House No.514, Sector 15, Panchkula.
…….Complainant
Versus
1. Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd. Mohali through its Managing Director/Authorised Person.
2. Sub Divisional Officer, Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd., Zirakpur, District Mohali.
……..Opposite Parties
Complaint under Consumer Protection Act.
Quorum: Shri Sanjiv Dutt Sharma, President.
Shri Inderjit, Member.
Present: Ms. Nisha Rattan proxy counsel for complainant.
OPs Ex-parte.
Order dictated by :- Shri Sanjiv Dutt Sharma, President
Order
The present order of ours will dispose of a complaint under Consumer Protection Act, filed by the complainant (hereinafter referred as ‘CC’ for short) against the Opposite Parties (hereinafter referred as ‘OPs’ for short) on the ground that CC is subscriber of a non domestic connection of the OPs bearing account No.Z74ZK110444M at her shop No.232, Saini Vihar, Phase-1, Zirakpur. It is averred that the CC had let out the shop to one Shri Sanjeev Kumar son of D.P. Gupta resident of House No.5, Saini Vihar, Phase-V, Baltana, Tehsil Derabassi, District Mohali. It is further averred that the said tenant paid the rent to the CC only upto 30.04.2015 and after that he stopped paying rent. Accordingly rent petition was filed by the CC against her tenant which was allowed by the Ld. Rent Controller, Derabassi but the tenant locked the premises and stopped running the shop for the last one year before filing of this complaint. It is further averred that the tenant was not paying the electricity bills to the OPs also and the shop remained locked. The CC approached the OPs for disconnection of the electricity connection but the OPs told the CC that the same will be disconnected as per rules for nonpayment of electricity bills. But despite her application for disconnection of electricity connection, the OPs delayed the matter. It is further averred that when the bills were not paid by the tenant of the CC, in that event, the OPs were bound to disconnect the electricity connection in September, 2014 only, but even despite her several requests, the OPs did not disconnect the electricity connection. However, PDCO bearing No.174/13813 dated 08.05.2015 was ordered. It is alleged that the OPs in collusion with the tenant of the CC intentionally did not disconnect the connection even though the PDCO was ordered by OP No.2 on 08.05.2015 and 10.12.2016. It is further alleged that the OPs have flouted the Electricity Supply Instructions Manual-2017 and did not disconnect the electricity connection of the shop of the CC. No notice has been issued to the CC for nonpayment of bills. It is further alleged that the CC had to approach the CGRF, Patiala for the redressal of her grievance but her application was also dismissed vide order dated 11.07.2018.
Thus, alleging deficiency in service on the part of the OPs, the CC has sought the following relief:
(a) That the OPs be directed to issue the bills upto 08.05.2015 for arrears of electricity bills and waive off the remaining arrears or surcharge/bills etc. after that since PDCO was issued
(b) That the OPs be directed to pay compensation to the tune of Rs.50,000/- for mental agony, harassment and humiliation and Rs.11,000/- on account of litigation expenses.
The complaint of the CC is duly signed. Further the same is also supported by an affidavit of the CC.
2. OPs in the written statement have raised number of legal objections on the ground of maintainability, jurisdiction, cause of action etc. OPs have also termed the complaint as false and frivolous. On merits, it is admitted that the CC was consumer of the OPs, but at the same time it is averred that she is liable to pay all the electricity charges since the electricity was consumed. It is also averred that she is the sole owner of the premises which was given on rent by her. It is further averred that the permanent disconnection order was issued due to nonpayment of electricity consumption bills amounting to Rs.70,197/- by the complainant. It is further averred that due to shortage of staff, the PDCO could not be enforced after 08.05.2015 and 10.12.2016 and as such the OPs were not able to disconnect the electricity connection. It is further averred that the application of CC before the CGRF was also dismissed. Thus, alleging no deficiency in service on their part, the OPs have prayed for dismissal of complaint.
3. It is pertinent to mention here that after 17.02.2020, none appeared on behalf of the OPs, and as such the OPs were proceeded against ex-parte vide order dated 02.12.2020.
4. The CC in support of her complaint tendered in evidence her affidavit and various documents Ex.C-1 to Ex.C-5 and thereafter closed her evidence. On the other hand, counsel for OPs tendered in evidence affidavit of Er. Gaurav Kamboj, AEE Sub Division, PSPCL Dhakoli, District Mohali and documents Ex.OP-1 to Ex.OP-3.
5. We have heard learned counsel for the complainant and have gone through the file.
6. From the perusal of documents and the complaint, it appears that the OPs, despite issuance of PDCO dated 08.05.2015 and 10.12.2016, have not disconnected the electricity connection of the shop of the CC. There is nothing on the record nor any document submitted by the OPs that once the PDCO order was issued by the OPs, electricity connection of the shop of the CC was not disconnected immediately. Moreover, it is admitted in the written version of the OPs that due to shortage of staff, the PDCO dated 08.05.2015 could not be implemented. We feel, that it was incumbent upon the OPs to atleast inform the CC that the PDCO cannot be effected due to shortage of staff. We feel, that there is definitely negligence and deficiency in service on the part of the OPs which is duly proved on file. The OPs were duty bound to disconnect the electricity connection as pointed out by the CC immediately after the issuance of PDCO. The reason given by the OPs for not implementing PDCO is absolutely concocted, vague and absurd. The contention of the OPs in defending their action is absolutely not satisfying.
7. Now the question before us is as to whether once the PDCO was issued by the OPs on 08.05.2015 and when the premises of the CC remained closed since the tenant had fled from the premises of the CC and had locked it, the OPs are still entitled to recover the bills from the CC. We feel, that the OPs cannot absolve from their liability and put the same on the shoulders of the CC since they had not disconnected the electricity connection despite several requests of the CC and even after issuance of PDCO dated 08.05.2015. We feel, that deficiency in service on the part of the OPs is writ large on the file and it is proved that the OPs have also caused mental as well as physical harassment to the CC. We feel, that the CC cannot be asked to pay the bills after 08.05.2015, once the PDCO was issued. This shows the negligence of OP No.2 who was posted there at that time. The deficiency in service is proved against the OPs, but at the same time it is also a public money.
8. In view of our above discussions, the complaint is partly allowed. It is ordered that the OPs will immediately disconnect the electricity connection of the CC as per PDCO dated 08.05.2015. The OPs are further directed to put up the matter before the concerned Chief Engineer who will decide the matter of waiving off bills of the CC after 08.05.2015, if any, strictly in accordance with Electricity Supply Instructions Manual 2017 within 30 days from the date of receipt of free certified copy of order. The Chief Engineer of the OPs is further directed to convey his or her decision to the complainant within this period. The OPs are further burdened with a consolidated amount of compensation to the tune of Rs.10,000/- (Rs. Ten Thousand only) and OP No.2 will pay this amount from his salary to the CC, who was posted on 08.05.2015.
Free certified copies of the order be supplied to the parties as per rules. File be indexed and consigned to record room.
Announced
June 21, 2021
(Sanjiv Dutt Sharma)
President
(Inderjit)
Member
