AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
COMPLAINANT has claimed compensation on account of disconnection of electric supply line. It is stated that on account of deficiency in service and negligence, she has suffered.
OPPOSITE party has explained that complainant was supplied electricity for domestic consumption to the extent of 2 K.Ws. However, it was found on inspection that consumption was much more than 2 K.Ws. ranging from 9 K.Ws. to 12 K.Ws. at different times. Subsequently, it was found that consumption had been reduced. Since the heavy consumption raised a presumption that it must have been for industrial purpose, bill was sent for payment of the balance amount. Said bill not having been paid, line has been disconnected. Whether the consumption was for domestic purpose is the main question to be considered. We have no doubt that with the supply line provided there could not have been consumption of 9 K.Ws. or 12 K.Ws., as the case may be, without assistance of officers of the opposite party-Board. It is unfortunate that opposite party is protecting those officers. We hope that the officers during the relevant period should be called upon to explain their conduct how they could not detect such heavy consumption and necessary disciplinary action can be taken against them.
Complainant cannot get any benefit out of the aforesaid because on detection of heavy consumption when bill has been submitted for consumption of electricity for industrial purpose, it cannot be said to be a deficiency in service. Complainant, if so advised, may approach the appropriate forum for redressal of her grievance. In absence of any finding regarding deficiency in service, this Commission cannot give any relief.
WITH the aforesaid observation, the complaint is disposed of. Complaint disposed of. _____________