MOAZZEM HOSSAIN vs WBSEB

THIS appeal has arisen out of the judgment passed by the District Forum, Murshidabad, on 26.9.2001 in the case No. 117/2001, wherein the Forum below has allowed the case in part on contest but however without any cost and directed the O.P. to prepare a supplementary bill @ 750 units per months for the period from February, 2001 till installation of new meter. The complainant was directed to deposit the quotational amount within two weeks from the date of the order and after receiving the amount the O.P. would instal new meter within two months from the date of the receipt of the amount. The complainant was further directed to deposit the arrear amount by two monthly instalments.

THE brief facts of the case of the complainant before the Forum below were that being an industrial consumer under the O.P.-WBSEB he received bills for the month of February and March, 2001, through which the O.P. claimed 1200 units per month. According to the complainant this bill was highly exorbitant and fictitious as his consumption was on an average @ 250 units per month. THE complainant filed the case before the Forum praying for direction upon the O.P. for rectification of the inflated bills and to raise the bills @ 300 units per month. Being dissatisfied with the above mentioned order the complainant-appellant has preferred the present appeal before this Commission. According to the appellant the judgment passed by the Forum below is erroneous, unjust and liable to be set aside.

On careful perusal of the record it is noticed by us that the present appellant received two bills for the months of February and March, 2001 which were highly inflated according to the appellant where the respondent claimed 1200 units per month and he requested the respondent to rectify the bill but the WBSEB did not pay any heed to his request. The appellant also submits that the industrial meter is defective and he has prayed for changing it by a new one. We have carefully noticed that for changing the defective industrial meter a quotation was issued upon the appellant, but it was not paid by him and for this reason the WBSEB could not instal the new meter in the circuit. Regarding the inflated bills we are of the opinion that the Forum has no authority to assess the amount of the units. The remedy lies before an expert i.e., CEI, WB.

IN this context we may mention the provision of the Section 26(6) of the INdian Electricity Act, 1910, which states, "Where any difference or dispute arises as to whether any meter or bill is not correct, the matter shall be decided, upon the application of either party, by an Electrical INspector, and where the meter has, in the opinion of such INspector ceased to be correct, such INspector shall estimate the amount of energy supplied to the consumer...." In this context, we may refer to a judgment reported in 1997 (1) CHN page 50 (SC) in the matter of CESC v. N.M. Banka, which held. "The consumer should have approached the Electrical Inspector straightaway if he was aggrieved by the bills. The Court should have declined to intervene when the consumer approached the Court. The Court should have directed the consumer to avail of the statutory remedy."

CONSIDERING the facts and circumstances we are of the opinion that the above mentioned disputed bills for the months of February and March, 2001 should be referred to the Chief Electrical Inspector, West Bengal for adjudication. Going by the foregoing discussion we deem it appropriate to pass the following order : The dispute between the two parties is pertaining to two disputed bills for the months of February and March, 2001. The appellant shall pay 50% of the disputed units and the entire amount of the quotational amount raised by the WBSEB for installation of new meter in the circuit. After this payment of the quotational amount and the amount of the 50% of disputed units, the respondent shall instal a defect-free and new meter in the circuit within 7 days of receiving the amounts. Thereafter the entire disputed bills for the above mentioned months in question shall be referred to the CEI, West Bengal for adjudication. The CEI would do well to dispose of the matter expeditiously preferably within a period of three months from the date of reference. Be it mentioned that the decision of the CEI regarding the disputed bills will be binding on both the parties. Therefore, the appeal is dismissed on contest and the impugned order of the Forum is affirmed with some modifications. The appeal is disposed of accordingly however without any cost. Appeal dismissed.