ANIL BHATIA vs PUNJAB STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD

-THIS appeal by the complainant is directed against the order of the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Amritsar (hereinafter called the "District Forum") dated 22.6.2005 by which his complaint had been dismissed.

UNDISPUTED facts are that in a portion of the residential premises is being run as a Clinic by the complainant-appellant. There are four connections in the building. All the four connections in the building have been clubbed. In other words, the entire building is being treated by the Punjab State Electricity Board, for the purpose of electricity consumption, as one and the same premises. The complainant is being billed on commercial tariff (NRS) and not on the basis of domestic supply tariff. This controversy was made the subject-matter of challenge before the District Forum, which found no favour with the arguments of the complainant and dismissed the complaint. Hence the present appeal. Regulations 87.1 and 86.1.3 of the Sales Regulations of the Punjab State Electricity Board are in the following terms: "87.1. Availability-Available to single private house or flat for light, fan, domestic pumping sets and household appliances. Private dwellings, in which space is occasionally used for the conduct of business by a person residing therein shall also be served under this tariff. Where a portion of the dwelling is used regularly for the conduct of business, the consumption in that portion will be separately metered under separate connection and billed under the appropriate NRS tariff. If separate connection is not provided the entire supply will be classified under non-residential supply. Resale and sub-metering of supply to tenants or members of the same family residing in one premises shall be permitted. However, resale and sub-metering to other flats or households and other parties is strictly prohibited except with the permission of supplier. "86.1.3. In case where doctors are running full time O.P.D. clinics or hospitals providing facilities to patients (like X-rays, tests, operations etc.), Advocates converting a part of the house as full time office premises employing person for typing, dictation, peons and daftaries, use of a portion of house by TV cable operators, setting up of PCO''s and dairy farms etc. shall be covered under non-residential supply."

(Emphasis supplied)

In Appeal No. 1291 of 2004, Punjab State Electricity Board v. S.K. Batta, Advocate, decided on 6.4.2005 we had an occasion to consider the aforesaid regulations in case of an Advocate. After noticing the judgment of the National Commission in Revision Petition No. 2148 of 2004, Punjab State Electricity Board v. Raj Kumar Goklany, decided on February 17, 2005, it was held by this Commission that an Advocate who is using the premises for his profession would come under the aforesaid definition and would be charged NRS tariff. The National Commission in Raj Kumar Goklany''s case had observed as under: "In our view, under the Regulations framed by the Punjab State Electricity Board, complainant who is practising as a Lawyer and has established his office in the District Court premises, is required to pay for electric consumption charges as specified by the rule providing tariff in such cases. Rule makes clear provision that such offices shall be covered under non-residential supply."

The fact is that all the connections in the premises have been clubbed. Therefore, even if a part of the premises are used as clinic by a doctor, according to us, the premises would be covered by the aforesaid regulations. Following the judgment of the National Commission in Raj Kumar Goklany''s case (supra) and our own judgment in S.K. Batta, Advocate''s case (supra), we do not find any infirmity in the order of the District Forum. The appeal is dismissed in limine. Appeal dismissed.