Order in Electricity Bill by the Consumer Commission

 

STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION

WEST BENGAL

11A, Mirza Ghalib Street, Kolkata - 700087

 

First Appeal No. A/453/2018 ( Date of Filing : 10 May 2018 ) (Arisen out of Order Dated 29/01/2018 in Case No. Complaint Case No. CC/68/2015 of District Burdwan)

1. West Bengal State Electricity Distribution Co. Ltd. Panagarh Gr. Electric Supply, P.O. - Panagarh, P.S.- Kanksa, Dist. Burdwan rep. by Station Manager. 2. (O & M) Division of WBSEDCL City Centre, Durgapur, Dist. Burdwan rep. by Divi. Manager. 3. W.B.S.E.D.C.L Bidyut Bhavan, Salt Lake, Kolkata - 700 091, rep. by Chairman. ...........Appellant(s) Versus 1. Sri Biplab Hazra S/o Lt. Kartick Hazra, Ayama, P.O. - Shilampur, Dist. Burdwan, Pin - 713 169. ...........Respondent(s)

 

BEFORE:
	HON'BLE MR. AJEYA MATILAL PRESIDING MEMBER
	HON'BLE MRS. SOMA BHATTACHARJEE MEMBER

 

PRESENT:	Mr. Suvendu Das, Advocate for the Appellant 1

Dated : 01 Mar 2023

Final Order / Judgement

Hon’ble Mr. Ajeya Matilal, Presiding Member           The Ld. Advocate for the appellant is present. None appears on behalf of the respondent on repeated calls. It is now 12:45 PM.  So the matter is taken up for hearing. Heard the Ld. Advocate for the appellant.           Being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with judgment dt. 29.01.2018 passed by Ld. DCDRF, Burdwan allowing the complaint case no. CC/68/2015 on contest and directing the OPs to pay Rs. 2000/- only as compensation for illegal disconnection of the electric service of the complainant and also directing the OPs to reconnect to Consumer ID no. 500418850 used by the claimant within 15 days, appellants/OPs preferred this appeal.           The fact of the case as per petition of complaint is like that the respondent/complainant was a consumer having an electric connection being service connection no. 500418850 and Consumer No. C074887 for domestic purpose. The appellant no. 1, West Bengal State Electricity Distribution Co. Ltd. Panagarh Group Electric Supply sent a bill in respect of aforesaid connection on 10.01.2014 for Rs. 472/- and due date of payment was January, 2014. Thereafter, the appellant no. 1 sent a bill dt. 09.04.2014 for Rs. 468/- and due date was April, 2014. According to the respondent/complainant there was no possibility of raising any other bill. So, the complainant contacted the appellant/OP no. 1 as according to the complainant no other bill was pending. The complainant took up the matter with the authorities concerned. But subsequently, his electric line was disconnected. So the complainant filed the instant case. The OP contested the case. Both sides adduced evidence. Perused the material on record.            The point for consideration is that whether the impugned order suffers from any illegality.           The case of the appellants/OPs is like that there was another electric connection having Consumer ID no. 514042573 in the premises of the complainant at village Ayama, P.O. Shilampur and the said electric connection was disconnected on 18.10.2011 due to outstanding bills of Rs. 6167/-for the period of June, 2010 to December, 2011. But the complainant took the present connection in the said premises on 31.12.2012 without making payment of the claimed outstanding amount against the said disconnected meter. So, a notice was served upon the complainant vide memo no. PCC/Revenue/13-14/6245 dt. 31.03.2014. In spite of receiving the same, the complainant did not make any payment. So, the aforesaid connection was disconnected.           The Ld. Advocate for the appellant referred to Rule 3.5.1 of West Bengal Electricity Regulatory Commission vide notification no. 55/WBERC Kolkata dt. 07.08.2013.           The rule goes like that “In case there is any dispute in respect of the billed amount, the consumer may lodge a complaint with the Grievance Redressal Officer or the Central Grievance Redressal Officer of the licensee and thereafter to the Ombudsman in appeal against the order of the Grievance Redressal Officer or the Central Grievance Redressal Officer, if the consumer is aggrieved by the order of the Grievance Redressal Officer or the Central Grievance Redressal Officer, in accordance with the provisions of the concerned Regulations. In such case, the aggrieved consumer, pending disposal of the dispute, may under protest, pay the lesser amount out of the following two options:- An amount equal to the sum claimed from him in the disputed bill, or An amount equal to the electricity charges due from him for each month calculated on the basis of average charge for electricity paid by him during the preceding six months, The amount so calculated provisionally as per clause (ii) above by the licensee and tendered by the consumer shall be accepted by the licensee against that bill on provisional basis.”           So it appears from this discussion that the matter relates to billing dispute and the matter should have been referred to the Central Grievance Redressal Officer of Licensee working at the office of the appellant no. 1.           It transpires from this discussion that the complainant has chosen an inappropriate forum namely DCDRC, Burdwan for redressal of his grievances. So, the impugned order suffers from illegality and it cannot be sustained and requires to be set aside.            Accordingly, the appeal being no. 453/2018 is allowed ex parte against the respondent without any costs. The impugned order is set aside.           Liberty is given to the respondent/complainant to approach the G.R.O concerned within 60 days from this order for redressal of his grievances. The G.R.O is directed to dispose of the application if filed by the respondent /complainant as per rules.

 

[HON'BLE MR. AJEYA MATILAL]

PRESIDING MEMBER

[HON'BLE MRS. SOMA BHATTACHARJEE]

MEMBER