HARYANA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD Vs. NARESH KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) FIRST appeal No. 473/93 by Haryana State Electricity Board (for short Board) and First Appeal No. 487/93 by Shri Naresh Kumar, the complainant, are directed against the order dated 24.8.93 of the Haryana State Commission at Chandigarh allowing the complaint and directing the Board to restore the electric supply of the complainant and also pay a sum of Rs. 50,000/ - as compensation for the so called patent and glaring deficiency in service besides costs of Rs. 5,000/ -.

(2.) THE complainant alleged that he is a proprietor of a reputable business establishment in the name and style of Gupta Rice and General Mills, that the said Mill had admittedly been sanctioned an electric connection for running the Mill, that the cable installed by the Board from the transformer to the meter of the complainant was in a state of disrepair and had been sparking at several places leading to the ignition of the rice husk lying in the Mill which had been burnt a number of times, that the complaint has been lodged with the Board, and that on 10th September, 1993 the complainant expressly contacted Shri N.D. Agarwal, Sub Divisional Officer with an urgent prayer to replace the cable or repair the same and that he refused to do so unless a sum of Rs. 1000/ - was paid as illegal consideration. It is pleaded that as the complainant refused to accede to this unreasonable de -mand, the official got infuriated and threatened the complainant with dire consequences. It is further alleged that on 11th February, 1993 at about 5.30 p.m. the said Shri R.D. Aggarwal alongwith other employees visited the Mill of the complainant in his absence and asked the Chowkidar to load 10 bags of rice in the van of the opposite party on pain of hostile action but the Chowkidar of the Mill expressed his inability to meet such a demand and informed the complainant about the same and that some employees of the Board on 12th February, 1993 disconnected the electric supply without any notice and without disclosing any reason therefor or affording any opportunity of hearing to the complainant and consequently the complainant rushed for redress to the Senior Officers but the electric connection was not restored. The complainant alleged that he suffered grave financial loss besides humiliation because of the deficiency in service of the Board in illegally disconnecting the electric supply and not restoring it. The complainant claimed a compensation of Rs. 1,80,000/ -.

(3.) THE State Commission framed the question whether the Haryana State Electricity Board or its official can arbitrarily disconnect the electric supply of their consumers without any notice. The State Commission admitted documents PI to P25 and respondents documents R1 to R3 and also received the affidavits of Shri N.K. Kumar, Shri Anil Kumar, Shri Devi Dayal and Shri Joginder on behalf of the complainant and affidavits of Shri N.K. Aggarwal, S.D.O. and Shri R.N. Jindal on behalf of the Board. The witnesses were cross -examined before the State Commission. The State Commission in a well -reasoned and detailed order came to the conclusion that both as a matter of fact and equally as a matter of law and statutory rules, the Boards officials are not entitled to arbitrarily disconnect the electric supply of the complainant on the mere alleged basis of one or the other employee of the complainant refusing to sign some documents. As there was discrepancy and variations in the date of inspection, the State Commission on the appreciation of the evidence opined that it is extremely doubtful whether the Document R3 was prepared as alleged and purported to have been done on behalf of the officials of the Board and further whether the consumer or his employees Joginder Pal and Devi Dayal had ever refused to sign or attest the same. The State Commission also noticed the provisions of Sections 20, 24 and 26(6) of the Indian Electricity Act as well as statutory instruction No. 115 of the Sales Manual issued by the Board and came to the conclusion that the Board or its officials cannot arbitrarily disconnect the electric supply of their consumers without any notice to them. The State Commission granted a compensation of Rs. 50,000/ - besides directing the restoration of electric supply and costs of Rs. 5000/ -.