State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
Punjab State Electricity Board vs Hari Ram on 23 November, 2013
F.A. No.717 of 2009 1
2nd Addl. Bench
STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, PUNJAB
DAKSHIN MARG, SECTOR 37-A, CHANDIGARH
First Appeal No.717 of 2009
Date of institution:25.05.2009
Date of decision :23.11.2013
1. Punjab State Electricity Board, the Mall, Patiala through its
Chairman/Secretary.
2. Sub Division Officer, Punjab State Electricity Board, Sub
Urban Sirhind.
3. Senior Executive Engineer, Punjab State Electricity Board,
Division, Sirhind.
.....Appellants
Versus
Hari Ram alias Hari Singh S/o Sh. Phagga Singh, R/o Mullapur
Kalan, Tehsil and District Fatehgarh Sahib.
.....Respondent
First Appeal against the order dated
02.03.2009 passed by the District
Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum,
Fatehgarh Sahib.
Before:-
Shri Gurcharan Singh Saran, Presiding Judicial Member
Shri Piare Lal Garg, Presiding Member Shri Jasbir Singh Gill, Member Argued By:-
For the appellants : Dr. P.K.Sekhon, Advocate with Ms. Sukhmeet Kaur, R.A. For the respondent : None PIARE LAL GARG, MEMBER:-
The appellants have filed this appeal against the order dated 02.03.2009 passed by the learned District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Fatehgarh Sahib (in short "the District Forum") vide which the complaint of the respondent was accepted. F.A. No.717 of 2009 2
2. The electric connection of the respondent was checked on 10.08.2008 by AEE, Baradi Ala Singh and SDO City Bassi pathana in the presence of respondent. During checking it was found that the respondent was committing theft of energy by direct connecting the wires into grips from joint and the grips were pulled out, while the electricity supply was running. The checking report was prepared at the spot. On the basis of checking report a demand of Rs. 79,950/- was raised vide memo no.1427 dated 13.08.2008 was issued as theft charges from the respondent as per Electricity Act.
3. Ms. Sukhmeet Kaur, R.A. of the appellant made a statement that the appeal may be disposed of as per the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in Civil Appeal No.5466 of 2012 (arising out of SLP (C) No.35906 of 2011) titled as "U.P. Power Corporation Limited & Ors. Vs Anis Ahmad", decided on 1st July, 2013. The Hon'ble Supreme Court please to pass the following order regarding the assessment made under Section 126 of the Electricity Act, 2003 or action taken under Section 135 to 140 of the Electricity Act:-
"A complaint against the assessment made by assessing officer under Section 126 or against the offences committed under Sections 135 to 140 of the Electricity Act, 2003, is not maintainable before a Consumer Forum".
4. The subject matter of this case is covered U/s 126 of the Electricity Act, 2003, as such, in view of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, the complaint filed by the respondent/complainant is not maintainable and the District Forum was not having the jurisdiction to try and decide the complaint. F.A. No.717 of 2009 3
5. Accordingly, the appeal filed by the appellants is accepted only on the point of jurisdiction and not on merits as the District Forum was not having the jurisdiction to try and decide the complaint as held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. The impugned order under appeal dated 02.03.2009 passed by the District Forum, Fatehgarh Sahib is set aside. The complaint of the respondent/complainant is also dismissed being not maintainable.
6. The record of the District Forum, complete in all respects, be sent back to the District Forum immediately. The District Forum is directed to procure the presence of the respondent/complainant and return the complaint to the complainant.
7. However, the respondent/complainant is at liberty to approach the appropriate authority as per The Electricity Act, 2003.
8. The period spent while pursuing the complaint before the District Forum as well as in this appeal will be excluded under Section 14 of the limitation act, 1963 by the appropriate authority as per the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in case "Trai Foods Ltd. v. National Insurance Co. and others", (2004) 13 SCC 656.
9. The case was adjourned for 19.11.2013 for further proceedings.
10. Now the order be communicated to the parties, free of cost.
11. If the respondent/complainant had deposited any amount to comply with the interim order of the District Forum or the State Commission with the PSEB (now PSPCL) then the same shall be adjusted towards the demand in dispute or the said amount may be considered as part of deposit, which is required to be deposited as F.A. No.717 of 2009 4 per Section 127 (2) of the Electricity Act, 2003 for preferring the appeal against the demand made under Section 126 of the Electricity Act, 2003 before the Appellate Authority(prescribed). If the amount is lying deposited with the District Forum then the District Forum shall pass appropriate order qua the amount at the time of returning the complaint to the complainant.
12. The appellants had deposited an amount of Rs.11,710/- with this Commission at the time of filing the appeal. This amount of Rs.11,710/- with interest accrued thereon, if any, be remitted by the registry to the appellant no.3 by way of a crossed cheque/demand draft after the expiry of 45 days under intimation to the learned District Forum.
13. The appeal could not be decided within the statutory period due to heavy pendency of Court cases.
(Gurcharan Singh Saran)
Presiding Judicial Member
(Piare Lal Garg)
Member
November 23, 2013 (Jasbir Singh Gill)
Rs Member