THE UTTAR PRADESH ELECTRICITY REGULATORY COMMISSION

Complaint No.12/2015

Quorum

Shri Desh Deepak Verma, Chairman

Shri I. B. Pandey, Member

In the matter of:

Sub: Petition under section 142 of the Electricity Act 2003.

Zafar Ali S/o Shri Mohd. Shahzade, E127/10, Karely, Allahabad. ------Petitioner

Versus

Executive Engineer, Electricity Urban Distribution Division, Kalyanidevi Division-1, Kamla Nehru Road, Allahabad. ------Respondent

ORDER

(Hearing on 22.09.2015)

The Electricity Ombudsman Vide Ref: 530 / Electricity Ombudsman / A(C-06) dated 25.05.2015, has made this reference to the Commission under section 142 of Electricity Act, 2003 read with rule 14 of UPERC (Consumer Grievance Redressal Forum & Electricity Ombudsman) Regulation 2007 regarding non compliance of order dated 04.10.2013 passed by CGRF, Allahabad in Case no. 108/2012 Shri Zafar Ali V/s Executive Engineer, Electricity Urban Distribution Division, Kalyanidevi Division-1, Kamla Nehru Road, Allahabad.

The operating part of the order dated 04/10/2013 passed by CGRF, Allahabad is reproduced below:

fnukad 06-05-2008 ls u;s ehVj dh jhfMax ds vk/kkj ij C;kt jfgr la”kksf/kr fcy cukus gsrq ifjokn Lohdkj fd;k tkrk gSA bl frfFk ds ckn dh vof/k ds fy;s tek dh x;h /kujkf”k fcy esa lek;ksftr dh tk;sA

In spite of repeated request of the petitioner, the respondent hasn’t complied with the above mentioned order, hence this petition has been filed by the petitioner against the respondent.

The show cause notice was issued to respondent by Commission on 28/07/2015 and parties were directed to appear in person before the Commission on 18/08/2015.

The petitioner vide letter dated nil received in Commission on 11/08/2015 has prayed for adjournment of hearing for any subsequent date on the ground of his illness.

Hearing on 18/08/2015

Petitioner is absent. Counsel for respondent Shri A.S. Rakhra, Advocate is present. As already stated above the petitioner vide letter dated nil received in Commission on 11/08/2015 has prayed for adjournment of hearing for any subsequent date on the ground of his illness.

It has been submitted on behalf of the respondent that the petitioner is avoiding the payment of bills and hearing of the case therefore he has moved the adjournment application on the false grounds.

The compliance report has been filed by the respondent. It has been stated in para 4 of the compliance report that the consumer has already initiated proceedings of representation no. C-06/2015 before the Electricity Ombudsman against the non compliance of order dated 04/10/2013 passed by CGRF, Allahabad. The Electricity Ombudsman, by means of an affidavit of the Executive Engineer dated 21/04/2015, was informed that when on 11/03/2015 the employees of the licensee went to the premises of the consumer to install a new meter, the consumer did not permit them therefore on 12/03/2015 the poll meter / check meter was installed on the poll and reading in the meter on 08/04/2015 was displayed as 173 units consumed by the consumer, therefore, based upon the meter reading of 173 units picked up by the new meter, the average meter reading was used for preparing the bill of the consumer between 28/04/2008 to 12/03/2015. It has further been stated in para 5 of the compliance report that with view to mislead and disillusion the Court below, the consumer filed an affidavit before the Electricity Ombudsman on 24/04/2015 stating that the poll meter was examined by him on 24/04/2015 and the same showed no display. The consumer further stated in his affidavit that the licensee is attempting to make the defective meter installed at his premises, being meter no. R005926. The respondent stated in para no. 6 of the compliance report that he has already submitted meter reading slip / instruction slip (copy) dated 08/04/2015 before the Electricity Ombudsman indicating the reading of 173 units. It has further been stated in para 8 of the compliance report that it is clear that the consumer does not wish that an updated bill should be served upon him and it is for this reason alone that he is not permitting the licensee to examine the meter installed at his premises and he is further falsely stating that the poll / check meter is having no display. The respondent further stated in para 9 of the compliance report that it is the intention of the consumer not to pay bills and to somehow to initiate and maintain contempt proceeding against the department. As per provision of Electricity Supply Code (clause 5.6, 5.7 and 5.8), there are clear provisions of preparing bills where in a given case, the meter becomes defective, not recording or burnt. However it is since not the intention of consumer to pay his bills, as such he is not allowing the department to prepare an amended bill in consonance with the provisions of the Supply Code and in insisting that his bill should be prepared as per meter installed at a premises, the reading whereof the consumer alleges to be correct and yet the consumer dose not facilitate access to the same. Further in para 10 of the compliance report, it has been stated that on 10/08/2015, the concerned Executive Engineer informed the consumer that notwithstanding the written request made in this regard, vide letter dated 27/06/2015, the consumer has not extended his co-operation in any manner and as such an amended bill of Rs. 63,297/- as per average of meter reading picked up by the poll meter is being prepared and served upon him and he was requested to clear the same. It has been lastly stated that respondent has not committed any contempt and the allegations to the contrary made by consumer against the answering respondent are fall and misleading.

The counsel for the respondent has orally undertaken that the copy of compliance report will be sent soon to petitioner by registered post before the date of hearing and receipt will be submitted before the Commission.

On the basis submissions made by the learned counsel for respondent and perusal of the compliance report, the hearing of the case is adjourned for 22/09/2015. No further adjournment will be allowed to petitioner.

List on 22/09/2015 for hearing.

Hearing on 22/09/2015

The petitioner is absent and the counsel for respondent Shri A.S. Rakhra, Advocate is present.

The applicant has sent adjournment application by fax on the ground of his illness. On the last date also the hearing was adjourned on the request of petitioner. The hearing is adjourned on the ground of the illness of petitioner.

List on 03/11/2015 for hearing at 15:00 hrs.

(I. B. Pandey) (Desh Deepak Verma)

Member Chairman

Dated: 09.2015

Page 4 of 4