AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
PUNJAB State Electricity Board has challenged order of District Forum, Ludhiana dated December 13, 1996 whereby the electricity bill issued by the Board for a sum of Rs. 10,662/- was held to be illegal and it was a case of negligence and deficiency in rendering service on the part of the Board. An enquiry was ordered to be held against the official responsible for taking no action on the complaint filed by Bhushan Kumar Gupta, the complainant on May 8,1995.
BHUSHAN Kumar Gupta, a consumer of electricity vide Account No. SK-24/03135 reported to the Electricity Board in writing on May 9,1995 that glass of the window of the meter was broken. Subsequently on August 16, 1995, the officials of the Electricity Board made some report of theft on the basis of which demand was raised for payment of Rs. 10,662/-. This demand was challenged before the District Forum in the complaint. The Electricity Board in its version took up the stand that Flying Squad on inspection of the premises on August 16,1995 found that it was a case of theft as glass of the meter was found tampered. Meter was sent to ME Laboratory, Ludhiana and on receipt of the report of theft, the bill was raised on load basis with reconnection charges etc. Both the parties produced their evidence on affidavits and documents on the basis of which impugned order was passed. Learned Counsel for the Electricity Board referred to the instructions issued by the Board as contained in the Sales Munual, Fourth Edition, page 209. Instructions No. 3 (vi) reads as under: "(vi) The theft of electricity is indulged in by tampering/providing fake ME seals, tampering with meter window glass or fixing mechanism and/or providing small hole in the body of the meter".
The contention is that when on August 16, 1995 the meter was inspected, glass of the meter was found tampered with and thus it was a case of theft and the bill issued accordingly is valid. This contention in the facts of the present case cannot be accepted for the simple reason that the factum of breaking of the glass of the meter had earlier been reported in writing to the office of the Electricity Board. To this effect assertion made in the complaint was specifically admitted in the written version submitted by the Electricity Board. Thus, it is not a case of finding tampering of the meter by the Flying Squad that as per instructions referred to above, it could be said that it was a case of tampering with the glass of the meter in order to commit theft of electricity.
EVERY case of broken glass of the meter cannot be a case of tampering with the glass of the meter. The element of mens-rea is inherent in the case of tampering. Whereas in the case of finding a glass broken by the consumer and reporting the same to the Electricity Board, there is no guilty mind of commission of any crime much less theft. It is in this context that the District Forum rightly observed that factum of broken glass as found by the complainant was promptly reported to the Electricity Board as back as May 9,1995. Report of ME Laboratory, Ludhiana does not indicate finding of any hole in the meter or any observation that with the tampering as alleged, there was any commission of theft of electricity through that meter. Orally, it was argued by Counsel for the Electricity Board that by placing some cord, the running of the meter could be stopped. In the case of surprise checks and finding material of stopping of the meter likewise, a finding could be recorded. But in the facts of the present case, no basis have been made for raising any presumption of commission of theft merely on the fact of broken glass being reported to the Electricity Board. The Electricity Board thus committed deficiency in rendering service in raising illegal demand by issuing bill for Rs. 10,662/-.
IT is the duty of the Electricity Board to provide and maintain a correct meter for which the Electricity Board charges rent. The bill includes a sum of Rs. 1,200/- as price of the new meter. When it is not found that the meter was tampered by the consumer, the Electricity Board cannot claim price of the meter from the consumer. On that account also, the demand raised was liable to be quashed. Learned Counsel for the Electricity Board further argued that such a disputed question required detailed evidence and the complainant should be relegated for his remedy to the Civil Court. This contention is without any merit. The complainant having already informed the Electricity Board about the broken glass, it was not the case of the Electricity Board to re-discover the broken glass by sending Flying Squad after few months. Inaction on the part of the Elecricity Board on the complaint made by the consumer shows the slackness with which the complaints are dealt with by the Electricity Board or their officials. It is left to the Board, if so advised to look into this matter and take departmental action, if necessary, against the defaulting officials/officers. For the reasons recorded above, this appeal fails and is dismissed with costs of Rs. 500/-. Appeal dismissed with costs.