False Disconnection Of Meter Connection; Kapurthala District Commission Directs Punjab State Power Corporation To Pay Rs 25k

Smita Singh

16 Jan 2024 7:00 AM GMT

  • False Disconnection Of Meter Connection; Kapurthala District Commission Directs Punjab State Power Corporation To Pay Rs 25k

    The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Kapurthala (Punjab) bench comprising Dr Harveen Bhardwaj (President), Rajita Sareen (Member) and S. Kanwar Jaswant Singh (Member) held Punjab State Power Corporation and Sub-Divisional Officer, (Ucha Sub-division) liable for deficiency in services for false disconnection of meter electricity connection. The bench directed it to pay Rs....

    The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Kapurthala (Punjab) bench comprising Dr Harveen Bhardwaj (President), Rajita Sareen (Member) and S. Kanwar Jaswant Singh (Member) held Punjab State Power Corporation and Sub-Divisional Officer, (Ucha Sub-division) liable for deficiency in services for false disconnection of meter electricity connection. The bench directed it to pay Rs. 25,000/- as compensation and Rs. 5,000/- for litigation costs to the Complainant.

    Brief Facts:

    Mr Balwinder Singh (“Complainant”) held an electric connection at his residence in village Dessal, P.O Saiflabad, District Kapurthala from Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd (“PSPCL”). The Complainant, belonging to the Schedule Caste community, stated that the electric connection was released under the SC category, with charges exempted for bill cycle units up to 400 units. The connection load was 0.500 KW, and the Complainant's average consumption was typically below 400 units. Despite this, the Complainant received a bill amounting to Rs. 81,590/-, which he deemed exorbitant. As a result, the Complainant, being financially constrained, was unable to pay the amount, leading to the disconnection of the connection by PSPCL without any prior notice. The Complainant made several communications with PSPCL but didn't receive any satisfactory response and received subsequent bills with questionable charges, including arrears and current consumption charges. Feeling aggrieved, the Complainant filed a consumer complaint in the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Kapurthala, Punjab (“District Commission”) against PSPCL and the Sub Divisional Officer (S.D.O.), Sub Division Ucha.

    In response, PSPCL contested the complaint, raising preliminary objections to its maintainability. It argued that the Complainant's actions, omissions, and commissions bar the complaint. PSPCL argued that the Complainant, in collusion with the meter reader appointed by a private company through an outsourcing system, was suppressing actual consumption. It asserted that the electric connection was disconnected on 12/1/2020 after a visit to the Complainant's premises revealing theft of energy by manipulating the wiring. PSPCL presented a checking report noting that the Complainant committed theft, which was signed by the SDO Sub Division Ucha, JE, ASI, Member Panchayat, and the Complainant's son.

    Observations by the Commission:

    In addressing the matter of the Complainant's alleged suppression of electricity consumption units in collusion with the meter reader, the District Commission emphasized that monitoring and managing electricity consumption was primarily the responsibility of PSPCL. Therefore, the District Commission held that the Complainant should not bear the consequences of any wrongful acts committed by PSPCL or the S.D.O, Sub-division Ucha, in this regard. The District Commission highlighted the importance of PSPCL taking appropriate measures to oversee and regulate electricity consumption according to departmental instructions.

    Referring to the checking report and an FIR filed against the complainant under Section 135 of the Electricity Act, the District Commission held that it falls outside the jurisdiction of the Consumer Forum to address complaints related to assessments and offences under the Electricity Act. Therefore, it rejected PSPCL's application regarding additional evidence for theft of electricity by the Complainant. 

    Consequently, the District Commission directed PSPCL and S.D.O., Ucha to immediately restore the Complainant's electricity connection, which was disconnected due to non-payment. It was further directed to compensate the Complainant with Rs. 20,000/- for the harassment suffered, along with Rs. 5,000/- as litigation expenses. 

    Case Title: Balwinder Singh vs Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd. and Anr.

    Case No.: Complaint No. 39 of 2021

    Advocate for the Complainant: Shri Chandan Puri

    Advocate for the Opposite Parties: Shri K.S. Bawa

    Click Here To Read/Download Order



    Next Story