SANTOKH SINGH vs PUNJAB STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD

SHRI Santokh Singh is the revision petitioner/original complainant who filed this petition against the order of the State Commission, Punjab arising from the Appeal No. 1013 of 1999 dated 10.1.2003. SHRI Santokh Singh runs a seasonal factory for which a seasonal electric connection was given to him. The season of the said factory starts from 15th September of every year and ends on 31st May of the next year. The complainant worked the factory during the season September, 1996 to May, 1997. However, he did not work the factory for the seasonal period for next year i.e. September, 1997 to 31.5.1998. For seasonal connections, the Punjab State Electricity Board treat the working period as minimum of four and a half months for the purpose of billing for electricity consumption. Accordingly, PSEB gave a bill for Rs. 42,356/- as minimum charges for the period 15.9.1997 to 31.5.1998 and the complainant/petitioner deposited the amount. His plea is that he is not able to pay this minimum charges for the season 1997-1998 and he did not work in the factory and gave proper information to the Electricity Board about the same. He, therefore, sought refund of this amount along with interest. Subsequently, the Electricity Board gave another Bill No. 7068 for Rs. 23,475/-.

THE complainant approached the District Forum seeking refund of the amount of Rs. 42,356/- wrongly paid against Bill No. 95 and for issuance of directions to PSEB for cancellation of Bill No. 7068 for Rs. 23,475/-. The District Forum held in favour of petitioner. In appeal by the Electricity Board, the State Commission examined the provisions of the PSEB Sales Manual according to which certain minimum charges are required to be paid by the consumers irrespective of whether power was consumed or not, since these minimum charges are to cover fixed charges incurred by the Board for providing supply lines etc. and to take care of such matters as establishment costs, depreciation over fixed assets etc. The State Commission allowed the appeal setting aside the order of the District Forum. The present revision petition arises out of the above order.

We have gone through the case papers. We agree with the State Commission that provisions for supply and sale of electricity energy to consumers in the Condition 27 of PSEB Sales Manual are absolutely clear. In fact the Manual goes to the extent of saying that the minimum charges will be payable even if the electricity is not consumed because supply has been disconnected by the Board due to non-payment of electricity charges, pilferage, malpractices etc. However, after permanent disconnection liability of payment of the minimum charges will cease. As brought out by the State Commission it is not the case of the petitioner that his connection was permanently disconnected nor that he made any request for permanent disconnection. Under the circumstances revision petition stands dismissed. The order of the State Commission is confirmed. Revision Petition dismissed.