DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, KANDHAMAL, PHULBANI

                                                                                            C.C NO. 08 OF 2013

Present:   Sri Rabindranath Mishra          - President.

                  Miss Sudhira Laxmi Pattanaik - Member.

                  Sri Chakadola Mallick                - Member.

Mayadhar Jenamani

S/O- Late Bikram Jenamani

Resident of D.R.D.A Colony,

PO/PS: Phulbani Dist: Kandhamal                      ……………..   Complainant.

                         Versus.

1. The Vigilance Enforcement Officer

     Electrical Circle, Bhanjanagar, Ganjam.

2.  The Executive Engineer,

     Electrical, SOUTHCO, Phulbani

     Dist: kandhamal .                                              ………………..  OPP. Parties.

For the Complainant  : Sri M.K. Mohanty, Advocate and his associates.

For the Opp. Party     : sri H.Ch. Maharana , Advocate .

Date of order: 23-12-2014

                                                                                                   O R D E R

                                    The case of the Complainant is that the Complainant is a bonafide Consumer under the Opposite party No.2 vide Consumer No. 1004/D-554. On 06-03-2012 a group of people came to his quarters in his absence and gave an inspection report of the Electricity meter stating that meter was found slow and should be changed immediately. Subsequently he received the red inspection paper from his wife. He reported the matter to his authority P.D, D.R.D.A and to the GED, Phulbani for correction. On 12-01-2013 again a group of people entered inside his house and tested the meter by breaking seal and box and gave a red notice which defers than the notice given earlier. After some days he has received provisional assessment penal bill amounting Rs. 34,235/- which is arbitrary and not maintainable in the eye of law. In the earlier bill nothing was shown regarding the defectiveness of the meter and the reading was taken by the technical person of the O.P No.2. After receipt of the said bill he had filed an objection before the O.P No.1 but the matter was not heard. Rather he has demanded Rs. 15,000/- as bribe for which this complaint has been filed for harassment by the Opposite Parties.

                                                                                                           -2-

                                    The case of the Opposite Parties as per their version is that on 22-01-2013 the vigilance and enforcement team entered into the premises of the Consumer with prior intimation and inspected the meter and service wire and found the meter is slow by 74.46% through a magnet on the meter box to effect the magnetic filed of the meter and also tampering the seals of the meter box. The inspecting Officer suggested for replacement of meter in his inspection report. A copy of the inspection report was handed over to the occupant. The Vigilance and enforcement officer being the assessing officer empowered under Section 126 of the Electricity Act, 2003 provisionally assessed the loss caused due to unauthorized use of the electricity to the extent of Rs. 34,235/- as per his order which was served on the Consumer with direction to file objection if any within 15 days and to avail an opportunity of hearing on 22-02-2013.Hence, the provisional assessment was conformed as per section 126 (3) of Electricity Act. 2003 and communicated to the Consumer with direction to file appeal under section 127 of the Electricity Act if aggrieved.

                                    The further case of the Opposite Parties is that the Forum has no jurisdiction to entertain the complaint of the Complainant. In view of the judgement given by Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of U.P Power Corporation Ltd. Versus Anis Ahmad and as per decision given by Hon’ble High court of Gujrat in case of Manoramaben Kansara Vrs. Madhaya Gujrat Vij  Company Ltd. Hence, he prayed to dismiss the complaint with cost.  

                                    We have heard both the learned counsels in this case. We have gone through the Complaint petition, the version of the Opposite parties and the documents filed by the Complainant. The Complainant has not filed any affidavit in support of his case. On perusal of the inspection report dated. 22-01-2013 it is seen that a magnet placed on the box of meter to affect the magnet filed. The Complainant failed to adduce any evidence to counter the said inspection report. In the absence of suitable evidence the complaint petition filed by the Complainant can not be considered. Hence, the complaint petition is dismissed on devoid of merit. The Complainant is at liberty to file appeal before the competent authority as per provision of the Electricity Act 2003.

                                    The case is disposed of. The interim order passed by this Forum on 31-03-2013 is here-by vacated. . Supply free copy of this order to both the parties.

                              MEMBER                                            MEMBER                                                   PRESIDENT.