Back
2004 (2) 462 CPR
CHHATTISGARH STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, RAIPUR
V.K. Agrawal, President; Smt.
Veena Misra and Shri R.S. Awasthi, Members
Smt. Hameeda Begum—Appellant
versus
Executive Engineer & Ors. — Respondents
Appeal Nos. 873/2003, 875/2003 & 897/2003
Decided on 21-5-2004
For the Appellant :Shri J.L. Sharma, Shri R.K. Bhawnani, Advocates.
For the Respondents:Shri R.K. Bhawnani and J.L. Sharma, Advocates.
IMPORTANT POINTS
1.In case of electricity theft, Electricity Board will be within its right to disconnect electric supply without any notice as Section 24 of Electricity Act would have no application.
2.Where electricity theft is found being committed Section 26 of Electricity Act will have no application for Electricity Board for issuing additional bill.
Headnote:Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Sections 12 and 17 — Disconnection of electricity supply to ice factory of com-plainant when theft of electricity was found being committed during inspection — An additional bill for Rs. 3,13,150/- was issued — Distt. Forum found that there was theft of energy by complainant and Board was justified in disconnecting energy supply but additional bill could not be for more than six months to be prepared on basis of average consump-tion of preceding six months — Appeal — Electricity Board ought to have been made party by complainant — No specific averment of malafide against any of officers of Electricity Board — Material prima facie showing that theft of electric energy was being committed — Electri-city Board was within its right to dis-connect electric supply without giving notice as Section 24 of Electricity Act had no application — Being not a case of defect in meter but a case of theft of electricity, Section 26 of the Act was not attracted & Board was entitled to raise bill calculated in terms of Clause 31(3) of general conditions for supply — Order of Distt. Forum setting aside additional bill was unsustainable.(Paras 19, 29, 32, 43 to 48)
Result: Appeals disposed of.
V.K. Agrawal, President — Appeal Nos. 873/03 & 875/03 arise from the common order dated 16.8.2002 in complaint No. 180/02 by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Raipur (hereinafter called the Distt. Forum for short) directing that the Electricity Board shall raise a bill on the average of the last six months with regard to complainant’s electric service connec-tion No. 190042 and on the complainant paying the said bill, the said electric connection shall be restored.
2. Appeal No. 897/2003 is directed against the order of the Distt. Forum dated 16.8.2002 dismissing complaint No.219/2002 filed by complainant, Vijay Shankar Gupta.
3. Since all the above three appeals arise due to the same action of disconnection of electric connection of both the complainants by the opposite parties, of complaint No. 180/2002 and complaint No. 219/2002 and involve common questions for consideration, they are being disposed of, by this com-mon order. In this order, for the sake of convenience, parties would be referred to as the complainant and opposite parties. Further unless otherwise specified, the complainant referred in this order would mean the complainant of complaint No. 180/2002.
4. Undisputably, the complainant Hameeda Begam (appellant in appeal No. 873/2003) runs Mali Ice Candy factory (Ice factory) at Tatyapara, Raipur and has obtained electric service connection No.190042 from the Electricity Board. Engineers of the Electricity Board in the night intervening between 24th and 25th April 2002 inspected the said Ice Factory and allegedly found theft of electricity and accordingly prepared panchanama on the spot. The electric connection of the said Ice Candy factory of the complainant was disconnected by the officers of the Electricity Board on 25.4.2002, on the allegation that the complainant was uti-lising electric connection by committing theft of electricity. Later on additional
bill dated 29.4.2002 for Rs. 3,13,150/- (Annexure D-2 in complaint No. 180/2002), was sent to the complainant by the Electricity Board. A report was also lodged with the police station Tikrapara, Raipur for theft of electricity against the complainant.
5. Undisputably, the complainant Vijay Shankar Gupta (of complaint No. 897/2002) has residential premises near the Ice Candy factory of the complainant Hameeda Begam (of complaint No. 180/2002). The said complainant Vijay Shankar Gupta had obtained electricity connection in his residential premises from the C.G. State Electricity Board under service connection No. 646298. The said connection was also discon-nected on 25.4.2002, as theft of electricity in the neighbouring premises of Mali Ice Candy Factory was being facilitated, by the illegal connection from the service line of complainant. The electricity of the said connection has been subsequently restored on 10.6.2002.
6. The complainant Hameeda Begum (of complaint No. 180/2002) felt aggrieved by the aforesaid action of the officers of the Electricity Board. According to the averments in the complaint, the officers of the Electricity Board without intimation to the complainant went to her factory, and prepared a false case of theft of electricity and also lodged a report against the complainant, at police station Tikarapara, Raipur. It was further averred that on 25.4.2002, the electric connection of the complainant was also disconnected. The complainant on coming to know about the action as above, protested and sent a notice dated 28.4.2002 by telegram and requested the Electricity Board to restore her electric connection and pay her compensation. However, the electric connection has not been restored. It was averred that action as above, resulted in closure of the Ice factory of the complainant causing loss to the complainant. It was prayed in the complaint that electric connection of the said service connection No. 190042 be directed to be restored and compensation for the period of disconnection @ Rs.
l, 000/- per day be also awarded in favo
