ELECTRICITY DISTRIBUTION CIRCLE Vs. RAMVIR SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal against the judgment and order dated 25.8.1998 passed by District Consumer Forum, Muzaffarnagar in Complaint Case No.36/1997. The facts of the case as stated in brief are as follows.

(2.) The complainant Ramvir Singh, resident of village Bamanhedi Tehsil and District Muzaffarnagar, is bhumidhar farmer. In order to irrigate his fields he got a power connection No.11/21775 of 7.5 H. P. sanctioned from the opposite party to operate the tubewell. The connection was sanctioned in the year 1982 and as such the complainant is the consumer of the opposite party. At the time the connection was sanctioned an agreement was entered into between the two parties, the terms and conditions of which are binding on them. One of the two parties has any power to terminate the agreement arbitrarily. As per the regulations and the notification issued by the opposite party the connections provided for the purposes of irrigation are governed by the rate, schedule known as L. M. V.-5. This gives option to the complainant to consume electricity either on metered basis or unmetered basis. The complainant had taken unmetered supply and the same is incorporated in the agreement. The rate of electricity on metered basis under L. M. V.-5 is 50 paisa per unit on the basis of meter reading and minimum charges have been prescribed as Rs.55/- per H. P. For unmetered supply the rate is Rs.50/- per month per H. P. Since the complainant is the consumer of the unmetered supply, therefore, he has been paying the bills @ Rs.50/- per month per H. P. Later on by Notification No.1105 HC dated 28.10.1996 the tariff per H. P. consumption was reduced to Rs.40/- per month. Therefore, presently this rate of Rs.40/- is prevalent and payable from 1.8.1996. The opposite party is bound to charge this much amount of the tariff and cannot increase it as per terms of the agreement.

(3.) In July, 1996 the opposite party installed a meter on the electrical connection of the complainant contrary to the provisions contained in the agreement and to the regulations notified by the opposite party. The complainant had not given any option for installing the meter. The rate schedule of the connection was changed from L. M. V.5 to L. M. V.6. L. M. V.6 which is applicable on the industrial units and not on the farmers who use electricity for agricultural and irrigation purposes. After installing the meter in July, 1996 no bills were sent to the complainant nor any meter reading card was issued, rather on 20.9.1996 an illegal demand notice of a sum of Rs.24,892.40 was issued to the complainant. The complainant protested against this notice and a notice was given to the opposite party on 30.9.1996 which was duly received by Executive Engineer of the opposite party on 1.10.1996. The reply sent to the complainant was contrary to the rules. The complainant was informed that the supply was given from urban feeder and, therefore, the billing on the connection is being done on the basis of L. M. V.6. There was no such agreement between the two parties. Therefore, the reply sent was illegal.