MAHARASHTRA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD Vs. SHESHRAO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is the Revision Petition filed by the Maharashtra State Electricity Board against the order of the Maharashtra State Commission dated 14.6.1995 affirming the order of me District Forum dated 29.2.1992. The basic issue in this case is in regard to the validity and reasonableness of the service charges levied on and received from the respondent-complainant for providing him with an electric connection for domestic purpose. The respondent-complainant, Shri Sheshrao had complained before the District Forum that the service charge of Rs. 5,000/- was in contravention of rules and provisions of the Indian Electricity Act and should, therefore, be refunded to him with interest. The District Forum allowed the complaint on the ground that the Maharashtra State Electricity Board could not have fixed these service charges in contravention of Clause 6 of the Schedule of the Indian Electricity Act, 1910. In appeal by the Maharashtra State Electricity Board, the State Commission, Maharashtra, upheld the order of the District Forum dismissing the appeal of the Board.

(2.) The contention of the Maharashtra State Electricity Board is that the Board was empowered to prescribe terms and conditions, as it may deem fit, for supply of electricity to any person other than the licensee in accordance with Section 49 read with Section 79 of the Electricity Supply Act, 1948 and the amount of service line charges was notified in their Circular No. 23947 dated 22.12.1986 issued by the Board to its various offices for providing guidelines for recovery of capital cost contribution (non- refundable) from the new consumers in such areas as had no service line or infrastructure adequate enough to meet the need of the prospective consumers of electricity within a reasonable period. In effect, the charges were prescribed by the Board for mobilising resources for various infrastructural facilities necessary for providing electricity connections to the new consumers and in the new areas. These service charges were prescribed in a manner so as to be equitable and fair to all the prospective consumers in an area rather than burdening the first consumer only for the amount spent on providing basic infrastructure.

(3.) This Commission had considered the issues involved in this Revision Petition in a similar case in Maharashtra State Electricity Board v. Sheshrao Ajabrao Sherkar, Revision Petition No. 573 of 1994, decided on 15.5.1995 (NC), and took a view, which has been taken consistently by this Commission, that the reason- ableness or otherwise of the cost or price charged for rendering a service is not a matter falling within the purview of adjudication under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, and all that the Forums are concerned with is whether there has been any deficiency in the matter of rendering the service that has been contracted for. In the present case the Electricity Board issued a notice to the respondent-complainant to deposit a sum of Rs. 5,000/- as service charges in accordance with their guidelines for providing a new electricity connection in similar situations and this amount was deposited by him accordingly. Thereafter, service connection was provided to him by the Board. There is no allegation of any deficiency in service as regards providing electricity connection on the payment of prescribed service charges.