Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

10. Learned counsel has also submitted that the District Commission has held in its order that the Chief Engineer, Border Zone had written a Memo dated 28.03.2018 (Ex.C-4) to the Assistant Account Officer to reconsider their decision and the appellant- Corporation had admitted that the levy of amount vide Memo dated 01.03.2018 was erroneous as it was only an internal communication of the appellant-Corporation and the same cannot be stated to be an admission on the part of the appellant-Corporation. The findings recorded by the District Commission to this effect are liable to be set aside. Learned counsel further submits that the District Commission has held that the appellant-Corporation was not to levy any amount as sundry charges and by doing so, it has violated its own Regulations. However, as per Clause 93 of Section VI of ESIM, the amount so levied on the basis of report of the Internal Auditor was charged and reflected in the subsequent bills as dues.

i) M/s Prem Cottex v. Uttar Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Ltd.

20121 (4) RCR (Civil) 422 (SC);

ii) Uttar Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Ltd. v. M/s Sada Ram Somnath Rice Mills 2020 (4) CPR 138 (NC);

iii) Bhim Sain v. Punjab State Electricity Board 2014 (1) CLT 607; and

iv) M.P. Pashchim Kshetra Vidhyut Vitaran Co. Ltd. v. Suresh Kumar I (2016) CPJ 15A.

14. Mr. Pardeep Hira, proxy for Mr. Naveen S. Bhardwaj and Ms. Priyanka Chaudhary, learned counsels for the appellant-PSPCL in other connected appeals has also reiterated similar arguments as raised by counsel for appellant(s) in other appeals. Learned counsel has further submitted that the demand raised was on account of power factor surcharge, which could not be raised earlier in the relevant bill. It was raised subsequently after the Audit Party pointed out such lapse. In case a licensee discovers in the course of audit or otherwise that a consumer was short billed, the licensee is competent to raise the demand. Raising of demand subsequently for good reasons does not amount to an act of 'deficiency in service'. Learned counsel has further submitted that in certain cases where the consumer is billed for some of the dues relating to previous months/years or otherwise as arrears on account of under assessment/unauthorized use of electricity or demand/load surcharge as pointed out by Internal Auditor/detected by the authorized officers either owing to negligence of the PSPCL employees or due to some defect in the metering equipment or due to an application of wrong tariff/multiplication factor or even due to any mistake in connection or other irregularities/malpractices etc. In all such cases, separate bills are required to be issued by giving complete details of the charges so levied. Such charges are shown as arrears in the subsequent electricity bills till the payment thereof is made. Supplementary bills are required to be issued separately by giving complete details of the charges relating to theft cases, slowness of meters, wrong connections of the meter and unauthorized of use electricity etc. In such cases the copy of relevant instructions under which the charges are levied are also supplied to the consumer for facilitating them for quick disposal of cases by consumer forums if approached by the consumer. Learned counsel further submits that the complainant had misled the District Commission by stating that the demand was raised on account of capacitor surcharge, whereas in the representation submitted by the complainant through his association, the reference of the demand was mentioned as power factor surcharge. There is no 'deficiency in service' on the part of PSPCL and the impugned order(s) are liable to be set aside.

25. Learned counsel for the appellant has relied upon Instruction No.93.1 of the Electricity Supply Instructions Manual, which is reproduced as under:

"93. PAYMENT OF ARREARS NOT ORIGINALLY BILLED:
93.1: There may be certain cases where the consumer is billed for some of the dues relating to previous months/years or otherwise as arrears on account of under assessment/unauthorized use of electricity or demand / load surcharge pointed out by Internal Auditor/ detected by the authorized officers either owing to negligence of the PSPCL employees or due to some defect in the metering equipment or due to application of wrong tariff/multiplication factor or due to mistake in connection or other irregularities/malpractices etc. In all such cases, separate bills shall be issued giving complete details of the charges levied. Such charges shall be shown as arrears in the subsequent electricity bills regularly till the payment is made.