WEST BENGAL STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD vs NEMAI CHANDRA SAMANTA

THIS is an appeal by the West Bengal State Electricity Board (W.B.S.E.B.) against the order dated 2.1.1998 passed by the District Forum, Howrah in H.D.F. Case No. 6 of 1997.

SEVERAL grounds have been urged in support of the appeal. One of them is that the Forum had no power to direct the appellant not to charge anything from the respondent from the account month of April, 1996 till the replacement of the defective meter. The operative part of the judgment of the Forum is as follows : "The OPs shall replace the defective meter No. 030314 at the earliest. They shall not realise any charge including meter rental for the A/c month of April, 1996 till the replacement of the defective meter by a correct, meter having standard specification. Be it clear that no amount shall be payable by the complainant for the period covered by A/c month of April, 1996 till the date of installation of a new correct meter (illegible) and payments are to be made for the subsequent period subsequent to the replacement of the defective meter. There will be no order as to costs."

We have considered the matter in details. It appears that the electric meter bearing No. 030314 went wrong in October, 1988 and since then in spite of repeated requests it had not been corrected or replaced by a new one. But the appellant went on raising bills on average electric consumption of the respondent. It is not understood why the appellant turned a deaf ear to the request of the consumer for a pretty long time and went on raising bills on average consumption basis. Even after the impugned order was passed on 2.1.1998 the appellant did not take any step to replace the meter by a new one having standard specification. We fail to appreciate the stand of the appellant to the effect that in case of a billing dispute the consumer is required to make a reference to the Electrical Inspector. Even after the order of the Forum was passed way back in January, 1998 the appellant has not moved an inch for replacement of the defective meter which is an admitted fact. It is not clear why in spite of admission to the effect that the meter in question was defective the appellant did not remove the defect or replace the defective meter so far. In view of the circumstances narrated above, we feel inclined not to interfere with the order passed by the District Forum. The appeal is accordingly dismissed and the order of the District Forum is affirmed. Appeal dismissed.