HARYANA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD Vs. JAI DURGA PLASTICS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE brief facts of the present case are that the respondent -complainant is having electricity connection bearing account No. 7 -SOP -57. On 23.2.1996 the premises of the complainant was checked by ADV of the appellant -opposite parties and noticed that the connected load of the complainant was 29.170 K.W. against the sanctioned load of 15.435 K.W. Thus, the complainant was imposed penalty of Rs. 5,700 for excess unauthorized load of 13.735 KW, and the same was deposited by the respondent -complainant. Two burnt meters were also lying in the premises of the complainant, a glass of one meter was found broken and reading of the same was not visible. The reading of another meter was read by breaking the glass and was found 00005. The old meter which was burnt and replaced on 29.11.1995, however, the new meter which was installed on 29.11.1995 was also got burnt and replaced on 29.2.1996. As the reading of the meter was not visible, therefore, the complainant was billed on average basis since 11/95 to 2/95 at the rate of 1000 units per month tentatively and the account of the complainant was overhauled on the basis of connected load which was found at the time of checking. In this way, the complainant was charged a sum of Rs. 37,404.

(2.) THE complainant made representation to the higher authorities of the Nigam, upon which the case was referred to the competent authority for settlement. However, in the mean time the connection of the complainant was again checked up on 27.8.1996 upon which the M and P seals of the meter of the complainant were found duplicate and thus the dispute could not be settled. The complainant was served with a notice of assessment of Rs. 1,60,440 on account of theft of energy. The complainant deposited 50% of the penalty amount and thereafter the electricity supply of the complainant, which was disconnected, was restored.

(3.) CHALLENGING the penalty imposed upon him, the complainant invoked the jurisdiction of the District Forum seeking direction to the opposite parties to refund the amount of Rs. 85,920, besides compensation of Rs. 50,000 for mental agony and harassment caused to him. Upon notice, the opposite parties resisted the claim of the complainant and justified the penalty imposed upon the complainant as stated above. Both the parties led evidence in support of their respective claims. The District Forum accepted the complaint and granted following relief: