ORDER
K.S. Gupta, J. (Presiding Member)
1. In this revision, challenge is to the order dated 7.3.2007 of Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Rajasthan, Jaipur dismissing appeal against the order dated 4.3.1999 of a District Forum whereby debit entry of Rs. 24,827.77 made in the respondent’s account by the petitioner-Corporation was cancelled.
2. Respondent had obtained electric connection from the petitioner. He had hired the meter from the petitioner to measure the consumption of electricity. Meter stopped some time in March, 1994 and was changed in June, 1997. For the intervening period from March 1994 to June 1997, the respondent was billed for the minimum charges which he deposited. Respondent was found to be liable to pay difference of Rs. 24,327.77 by the audit party. Accordingly, bill was issued which the respondent challenged by filing complaint which was contested by the petitioner. Petitioner alleged that on pointing out of the audit party said amount had been rightly debited on average basis in the account of the respondent for the aforesaid period from March 1994 to June 1997.
3. The District Forum had accepted the complaint holding the petitioner to be deficient in service for not having replaced the stopped meter for a period of over 3 years. Thus, according to the Forum amount of Rs. 24,327.77 could not have been debited in the account of the respondent. In appeal by the petitioner this finding was affirmed by the State Commission.
4. We have heard Mr. Shyam Moorjani for the petitioner and have gone through Notification No. A&F/F. 14 (397)/63 dated 24.6.1964 issued by Rajasthan State Electricity Board, which is stated to be applicable, filed along with the revision petition.
Rules 19(d)(i), 19(d)(vii) and 19(6) of this notification are material for deciding the present revision. Rule 19(d)(i) read thus:
Reading of meters will be taken by the employees of the Board once in each month or such other intervals of times it shall think expedient and such meter readers shall have access to the consumer’s premises at all reasonable times for the purpose of such reading. The reading of each meter shall be entered by such reader in the meter card to be attached to such meter which shall be open to the inspection of the consumer.
Rule 19(d)(vii) provides as follows:
In the event of meter being out of order i.e. burnt/stopped or having ceased to function (except percentage of defect) for any reason during any month/months the consumption for the month/months shall be assessed by the billing authority or by the Vigilance Checking Officer or internal Audit Officer, as the case may be, as mentioned hereunder–
1. The quantity of electricity supplied during the period in which the meter stopped/ burnt/ceased to function, shall be determined by taking highest of the average consumption recorded out of the following four alternatives–
(i) Four months preceding the month in which the said meter stopped/ ceased to function.
(ii) Twelve months preceding the month in which the said meter stopped/ ceased to function.
(iii) Succeeding four months period immediately after the correct meter is installed.
(iv) Consumption of corresponding month/months of previous year.
Procedure of Assessment:
Initially the highest of the average consumption recorded out of the alternatives (I), (II) and (IV) above be taken for the purpose of assessment and a provisional assessment bill should be issued to the consumer (mark ‘Provisional Assessment’ on the bill)
After installation of correct meter the assessment be reviewed after succeeding four months period consumption [as per alternative (III) above] is available. In case reviewed assessment is higher than provisional assessment, the reviewed assessment shall be the final assessment. Otherwise the provisional assessment shall be the final assessment.
However, in cases where the consumption of preceding period is not available then the provisional assessment should be made on the basis of full minimum charges as per relevant tariff schedule.
Sub-rule (6) of above Rule 19 provides thus:
The out of order meter will be replaced by another one in good working order immediately or the same will be repaired, and reinstalled as expeditiously as possible. In case the meter belongs to the consumer, he should get his meter repaired and tested by the Board by paying the standard charges or by any other approved agency.
5. As is manifest from these sub-rules, the meter reading should be taken by the employee(s) of the petitioner once in each month or such other intervals or times it shall think expedient and if it is found that a meter is out of order, it will be replaced by another good working meter immediately by the petitioner. Further, in case of burnt meter, initially bill is to be raise on provisional assessment out of the alternatives (I), (II) and (IV) above and it is only after installation of correct meter that the assessment is to be reviewed after succeeding four months period consumption [as per alternative (III) above] and in case the reviewed assessment is higher than provisional assessment, the reviewed assessment shall be the final assessment. It is not the case of petitioner that before debiting the amount in question in the account of the respondent the provisional assessment was made and bills issued to the respondent. Not only that despite having learnt of the stopping of meter in March, 1994, the meter was replaced after more than 3 years in total violation of said sub-rules.
6. In this backdrop we are not inclined to interfere with the orders passed by Fora below in revisional jurisdictional under Section 21(b) of Consumer Protection Act, 1986. Accordingly, the revision petition is dismissed.