FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN … · FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER...

FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES

DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar-125 005

Telephone No. 01662-223081 (website: www.dhbvn.com) (e-mail ID: [email protected])

_______________________________________________________ Case No. DH/CGRF-698/2013 Date of Institution: 02.01.2013 Date of Hearing: 06.03.2013 Date of Order: 06.03.2013

Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN. Present:-

Sh. R.N.Garg, Member-I Sh. S.C.Aggarwal, Member-II

In the matter of complaint of Sh. Bihari Lal Bansal S/o Sh. Keshri Chand, White Kothi, Behind Verma Guest House, Near Auto Market, Aggarsain Colony, Sirsa regarding billing problem.

..…Complainant/Petitioner

V/s

1.Xen/Op. City Division, DHBVN, Sirsa. 2.SDO/City S/Divn., DHBVN, Sirsa.

…………….Respondents

Appearance:-

For Complainant: 1.Present. For the Respondent: 1. Nodal Officer/CGRF

2. SDO/City Sub Divn. Sirsa.

http://www.dhbvn.com/�

mailto:[email protected]�

ORDER

Sh. Bihari Lal Bansal, Behind Verma Guest House, Near Auto Market, Aggarsain

Colony, Sirsa have an electricity connection A/C No. T12-ST27/3597 under SDO/City Sub-Divn.

DHBVN, Sirsa, hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear this complaint.

The consumer has filed the present complaint stating therein that the Nigam has issued

bill by making wrong sundry charges.

The complaint was entertained and forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the Nigam’s

version and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on 06/03/2013 at Sirsa.

To-day, the consumer as well as SDO is present. The SDO submitted the final reply through

Nodal Officer vide memo No. 187 dated 22/01/2013, stating therein that the meter was defective

and replaced vide MCO No. 10759 dated 15/06/2011 along with consumption data from 02/2010

to 12/2012 and other details with full justification. During the course of Audit, the account

overhauled by the audit party for the period 01/2011 to 06/2011 on the basis of the consumption

recorded by the meter during 01/2010 to 06/2010 and pointed out under assessment of Rs.4436/-

vide half margin No. 93/170 which has been charged by the respondent SDO vide SC&AR No.

68/100.

Considering all the facts as well as reply of respondent SDO, the Forum decided that the

amount charged by the SDO is rightly recoverable from the consumer. The Forum disposed the

petition without any cost on either side and case is closed from the Forum.

File be consigned to record.

Given under my hand on this day of 6th

March, 2013.

(R.N.Garg) (S.C.Aggarwal) Member Member

FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM

D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar-125 005 Telephone No. 01662-223081

(website: www.dhbvn.com) (e-mail ID: [email protected]) _______________________________________________________

Case No. DH/CGRF-700/2013 Date of Institution: 04.01.2013 Date of Hearing: 06.03.2013 Date of Order: 06.03.2013



In the matter of complaint of Sh. Subhash Chand (user Ashok Kumar S/o Sh. Sabu

Ram), H.No. 95, D-Block, Sirsa regarding wrong billing.


V/s

1.Xen/Op. City Division, DHBVN, Sirsa. 2.AEE, Indl. Area S/Divn., DHBVN, Sirsa.


Appearance:-


2. AEE/Indl. Area Sub Divn. Sirsa.



ORDER

Sh. Subhash Chand (user Ashok Kumar S/o Sh. Sabu Ram), H.No. 95, D-Block, Sirsa have an electricity connection A/C No. SA26-2870/DS under AEE, Indl. Area Sub-Divn. DHBVN,

Sirsa, hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear this complaint.


bill by making wrong charges.



To-day, the consumer as well as SDO is present. The SDO submitted the final reply through

Nodal Officer vide memo No. 146/CA/IS dated 21/01/2013, stating therein that the premises of the

consumer was checked by Spl. Team by AE/Planning, Hisar on dated 01/10/2012 and found the

supply was used for DS to NDS (Chhabra Enterprises). The connection was applied by the

consumer for domestic category. The consumer was charged a sum of Rs.11840/- on account of

loss to Nigam and Rs.20,000/- on account of compounding charges being theft case as per Sales

Circular No. 43/2007. The SDO also issued a notice to the consumer for compounding the offence

of theft of electricity under section-135 and section-152 of electricity Act, 2003.

Considering all the facts as well as reply of respondent SDO, the Forum decided that

being theft case, this Forum cannot adjudicate the case, hence the case is rejected. The Forum

disposed the petition without any cost on either side and case is closed from the Forum.



March, 2013.


FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar-125 005 Telephone No. 01662-223081 (website: www.dhbvn.com) (e-mail ID: [email protected])

________________________________________________________________ Case No. DH/CGRF-702/2013 Date of Institution: 15.01.2013 Date of Hearing: 20.03.2013 Date of Order: 29/03/2013.

Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN.

Present:- Sh. R.N.Garg, Member-I Sh. S.C.Aggarwal, Member-II

In the matter of complaint of Smt. Meena Arora, Hansi Gate, Bhiwani regarding

wrong billing.


V/s

1. Xen/Operation City Division, DHBVN, Bhiwani. 2.AEE, S/U S/Divn. No.1, DHBVN, Bhiwani.


Appearance:-

For Complainant: 1.Representative For the Respondent: 1.Nodal Officer/CGRF,DHBVN,Hisar

2.AEE of S/U Sub-Divn. Bhiwani.



Smt. Meena Arora, Hansi Gate, Bhiwani have got an electricity connection, A/C No.

WC21-1447 under AEE, S/U S/Divn. No.1, DHBVN, Bhiwani, hence this Forum has jurisdiction

to hear the complaint.

ORDER

The complainant has filed the present complaint stated therein that the department had

issued bill by levy of ACD & service connection charges at double rate under VDS scheme.

Under VDS scheme, she increased her load and got changed the name of consumer on

23/10/2012. The consumer requested for correction of bill.

The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the Nigam’s version and both

the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on 19/03/2013 at Bhiwani for further

hearing.

To-day, the proceedings held on 20/03/2013, the representative of consumer as well as

SDO is present. The SDO submitted his reply through Nodal Officer vide memo No. 3058 dated

06/02/2013, stated that the premises of the above named consumer was checked by Spl.

Checking team vide LL-1 No.28/31 dated 05/10/2012 and found connected load 6.210 KW

whereas the sanction load is 2 KW i.e. load found excess 4.210 KW. This office has charged

the amount vide SC&AR No.36/190 as per Nigam instruction as under:

5 KWx1000x2 = Rs.10000/- ACD 5 KWx750x2 = Rs.7500/- S.C.C. Total = Rs.17500/-

This office has not charged any penalty being VDS period secondly Sh. Manoj Kumar

S/o Sh. Hari Ram was deposited Rs.7000/- ACD + Rs.140/- processing fees vide BA-16

No.71/1175 dated 23/10/2012 under application No.52740 dated 23/10/2012 for change of

name i.e. after carried out by checking vide LL-1 No. 28/31 dated 05/10/2012.

The matter is totally different being Smt. Meena Arora is first consumer of the Nigam

holder of account No. WC-21-1447 and Sh. Manoj S/o Sh. Hari Ram is other person who has

deposited the ACD Rs.7000/- vide BA-16 No.71/1175 dated 23/10/2012 for change of name.

Smt. Meena Arora has not deposited Rs.17500/- up-till now. Further the SDO vide memo No.

3601 dated 29/03/2013 has intimated that the account of the consumer has been overhauled

and a sum of Rs.10000/- on account of ACD and Rs.3750/- on account of service connection

charges has been refunded to the consumer which was wrongly charged at the double rate.

In view of SDO reply and considering all the facts, the Forum decided that the grievance

of the consumer has been redressed. The Forum disposed the petition without any cost on

either side and case is closed from the Forum.



March, 2013.




(website: www.dhbvn.com) (e-mail ID: [email protected]) ________________________________________________________________

Case No. DH/CGRF-703/2013 Date of Institution: 17.01.2013

Date of Hearing: 13.02.2013&15/03/2013 Date of Order: 15/03/2013


Present:-

Sh. R.N.Garg, Member-I

Sh. S.C.Aggarwal, Member-II

In the matter of complaint of Sh. Ram Murti Karwasra S/o Sh. Narayan Ram, Narayan

Kishan Sewakendra, Khara Kheri Road, Bhattu Mandi, Distt., Fatehabad regarding shifting the

supply from Rural Feeder to Urban Feeder.


V/s

1. Xen/Operation Division, DHBVN, Fatehabad.

2.SDO/Operation S/Divn, DHBVN, Bhattu.


Appearance:-

For Complainant: 1.Present in person.

For the Respondent: 1.Nodal Officer/CGRF,DHBVN,Hisar 2.Representative of Sub-Divn.Bhattu.



ORDER

Sh. Ram Murti Karwasra S/o Sh. Narayan Ram, Narayan Kishan Sewakendra, Khara

Kheri Road, Bhattu Mandi, Distt., Fatehabad have got an electricity connection, A/C No. BT21-

2712 (NDS) with sanctioned load of 11 KV connected with Rural feeder since 2009 under

SDO/Op.Sub-Division, DHBVN, Bhattu, hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint.

The complainant has filed the present complaint stated that only two feeders namely AP

feeder and Rural Domestic feeder were available across the site and his Petrol Pump

connection with Rural Domestic Feeder by crossing the road which crossing the Urban Feeder

(two-way crossing) which may cause any loss to public/property. The complainant demanded

his connection be transferred from Rural Feeder to Urban Feeder so that both of the said

crossings can be avoided. His petrol pump connection falls under Essential Services

Maintenance Act (ESMA). The regular supply of petroleum products can only be maintained

with the help of regular electricity supply which is possible through Urban feeder only in present

scenario. On contacting SDO, DHBVN, Bhattu Mandi for shifting from Rural Domestic feeder to

Urban feeder but the SDO denied by saying that connection of more than 50 KW can only be

shifted. The complainant visited the SDO office again & again but no fruitful results come into

force. The complainant requested for transfer his petrol pump connection from Rural Feeder to

Urban Feeder so that two type of crossings i.e. line crossing and road crossing will be avoided.


the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on 13/02/2013 at Hisar for further hearing.

During the hearing held on 13/02/2013, the consumer as well as SDO is present. The

SDO submitted reply through Nodal Officer/CGRF, DHBVN, Hisar vide memo No.253 dated

11/02/2013 is given as under:

1. The applicant is a regular consumer aof Nigam having A/C No. BT21-2712 (NDS) with

sanctioned load 11 KW as per ledger connected on LT supply from Nigam’s T/F from 11

KV Banawali RDS feeder.

2. Yes agreed.

3. Yes agreed.

4. Petrol Pumps installed in rural and suburban areas are running on RDS feeders with a

alternative generator sets arrangements. Hence plea is not sustainable.

5. The denial by SDO is solely as per norms and regulations of the Nigam with respect to

sale circular D29/2005 vide which loads 50 KW can be shifted from RDS to Urban mode

supply.

-: 2 :-

6. Losses and crossings are two difference things the increase in revenue is directly as per

proportional to load. The higher load will be revenue collection the line crossing and

road crossing are suitably earthed with double earth wire and guards.

7. Laws have to be followed and implemented.

8. Instructions/Circulars are issued after every announcement to be implemented and the

Nigam implements their in true spirits from the date mentioned for welfare of public.

9. This is policy matter. However in between a new sale circular D2/2013 has been

introduced by Nigam and applicants case has been sent to higher office (The SE/Op.

Circle Hisar vide memo No.1383/W8 dated 31.01.2013 by XEN/Op. Division, Fatehabad)

for further necessary action.

10. There is no if and but. The case has been forwarded ahead on the date of arrival of new

sale circular D2/2013.

On the reply of SDO, the complainant stated that LT CT meter has already been installed.

Shifting charges has also deposited one & a half years ago. A copy of reply of SDO is handed

over to the complainant.

The SDO admitted that the request of the consumer is genuine and as per instructions of

the Nigam, the case has been forwarded to SE/Op. DHBVN, Hisar through XEN/Op., DHBVN,

Fatehabad and committed that the connection will be shifted from Rural feeder to Urban feeder

within 20 days and reply be submitted in stipulated time.

To-day. the consumer as well as representative of the SDO is present. The consumer

submitted a representation, stating therein that the respondent SDO on dated 13/02/2013 has

committed in writing that the work will be done within 20 days but the same has not been

compliance till date. The representative of SDO has submitted the reply through Nodal Officer

vide memo No.409 dated 14/03/2013 and the copy of SDO reply has also handed over to the

petitioner. The SDO stating that the case has already been sent to XEN/Op. Divn., Fatehabad

on dated 28/02/2013 and XEN again sent the case to SE/Op. Circle, Hisar vide his memo No.

2640/W-8 dated 04/03/.2013 but necessary approval still awaited. As and when necessary

approval from the competent authority i.e. Director/Op., Hisar will be received, the connection

will be shifted from rural to urban feeder accordingly.

After hearing both the parties, the Forum decided and directed to the respondent SDO to

get the case approved from competent authority personally and connection be shifted from

Rural Feeder to Urban Feeder within 15 days positively. The Forum disposed the petition

without any cost on either side and case is closed from the Forum. File be consigned to record.


March, 2013.






Date of Hearing: 13.02.2013 Date of Decision: 13.02.2013


Present:-



In the matter of complaint of Sh. Mohinder Singh S/o Sh. Fateh Singh, H.No.1-A,

Amardeep Colony, Kaimri Road, Hisar regarding wrong billing.


V/s

1. Xen/Operation Division No.II, DHBVN, Hisar.

2.SDO/Operation S/Divn, DHBVN, Satrod.


Appearance:-

For Complainant: 1.None.

For the Respondent: 1.Nodal Officer/CGRF,DHBVN,Hisar 2.SDO/Op. Sub-Divn.Satrod.



ORDER

Sh. Mohinder Singh S/o Sh. Fateh Singh, H.No.1-A, Amardeep Colony, Kaimri Road,

Hisar have got an electricity connection, A/C No. KR1D-4183 under SDO/Op.Sub-Division,

DHBVN, Satrod, hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint.

The complainant has filed the present complaint stated that illegal charges by serving a

notice vide memo No.13997 dated 25/10/2012 of Rs.137860/- (Rs.97860/- +Rs.40000/-

compounding) on account of DS to NDS category.



During the hearing held on 13/02/2013, the consumer is not present but the SDO is

present. The SDO submitted reply through Nodal Officer/CGRF, DHBVN, Hisar vide memo

No.15282 dated 11/02/2013, stating therein that the premises of Sh. Mohinder Singh S/o Sh.

Fateh Singh bearing A/C No. KR1D-4183 DS, sanctioned load 3.000 KW, was checked by Sh.

Hosiyar Singh, AEE/RA and Sh. Ishwar Singh, JE along with other staff vide LL-1 No. 12/453

dated 19/10/2012 and found meter seals seems doubtful, hence the meter packed in cardboard

box in presence of above said person for checking of accuracy & seals of meters in M&T lab

DHBVN, Hisar and also supply found used in NDS purpose with connected load 3.773 KW and

videography made from the site. The meter got checked in M&T lab, Hisar in presence of Sh.

Mohinder Singh vide checking report 324/MT19 on 23/10/2012 and observe after opening the

electricity meter, an external electronic circuit (Remote) found inside. Hence, it is clear cut case

of theft of energy and amount charged Rs.1,37,860/- (Rs.97860/- as assessment + Rs.40,000/-)

as per S/C No. D-43/2007, vide SC&AR No.138/38 on account of theft of electricity. Further the

SDO served assessment notice/compounding notice vide office memo No.13997-98 on dated

25/10/2012 through Registered Post and also intimate to In-charge, Police Stn., Irrigation and

Electricity, Near Madhuban Park, Hisar vide office memo No. 13999 on 25/10/2012.

The Forum has considered all the facts of the case especially the remarks in the joints

checking report about both the firm seals found tempered and re-fixed with some adhesive.

After opening the meter, an external electronic circuit (Remote) found inside the meter. The

Forum is of the opinion that the complaint pertains to the case of theft of energy, hence not

entertained as per HERC regulation. The complaint is dismissed and the case is closed from

this Forum.



February, 2013.


FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar-125 005 Telephone No. 01662-223081 (website: www.dhbvn.com) (e-mail ID: [email protected])

________________________________________________________________ Case No. DH/CGRF-707/2013 Date of Institution: 30.01.2013 Date of Hearing: 20.03.2013 Date of Order: 20/03/2013.


Present:- Sh. R.N.Garg, Member-I Sh. S.C.Aggarwal, Member-II

In the matter of complaint of Sh. Rajeev Tuteja S/o Sh. Hans Raj Tuteja, Petrol

Pump, Dhani Rahimpur, Loharu, Distt., Bhiwani regarding wrong billing.


V/s

1. Xen, S/U Division, DHBVN, Bhiwani. 2.SDO/Op. S/Divn, DHBVN, Loharu.


Appearance:-

For Complainant: 1.None. For the Respondent: 1.Nodal Officer/CGRF,DHBVN,Hisar

2.SDO of Sub-Divn. Loharu.



Sh. Rajeev Tuteja S/o Sh. Hans Raj Tuteja, Petrol Pump, Dhani Rahimpur, Loharu,

Distt., Bahiwani have got an electricity connection, A/C No. AC-21-0882 under SDO/Op. Sub-

Division, DHBVN, Loharu, hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint.

ORDER

The complainant has filed the present complaint stated therein that he had deposited the

bill on 05/09/2012 after correction but the department has issued wrong bill again and again and

requested for correction of wrong bill.


the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on 19/03/2013 at Bhiwani for further

hearing.

To-day, the proceedings held on 20/03/2013, the consumer is not present but the SDO

is present. The SDO submitted his reply through Nodal Officer vide memo No. 612 dated

18/02/2013, stated that the account of the consumer has been overhauled vide SC&AR

No.59/87/399 giving refund of Rs.65477/- on account of SOP & ED on the basis of reading of

new meter installed vide MCO No. 5/1042 dated 15/10/2012.

In view of SDO reply and considering all the facts, the Forum decided that the grievance

of the consumer has been redressed. The Forum disposed the petition without any cost on




March, 2013.





________________________________________________________________ Case No. DH/CGRF-710/2013 Date of Institution: 12.02.2013

Date of Hearing: 13.02.2013&15/03/2013 Date of Order: 15/03/2013.


Present:-



In the matter of complaint of Sh. Bharat Singh S/o Sh. Inder Singh, Gali No.1, Mini Auto

Market, Delhi Road, Hisar regarding wrong billing.


V/s

1. Xen/Operation Division No.1, DHBVN, Hisar.

2.AGM, Civil Line S/Divn, DHBVN, Hisar.


Appearance:-

For Complainant: 1.Present in person

For the Respondent: 1.Nodal Officer/CGRF,DHBVN,Hisar 2.Counsel & CA of C/Line Sub-Divn.Hisar.



Sh. Bharat Singh S/o Sh. Inder Singh, Gali No.1, Mini Auto Market, Delhi Road, Hisar

have got an electricity connection, A/C No. OH12-AA2D-2273 under AGM, Civil Line Sub-

Division, DHBVN, Hisar, hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint.

ORDER

The complainant has filed the present complaint stated that my load was checked by the

DHBVN officials and charged wrong penalties. I am a poor person & doing the work of Cycle

Pencher etc. I have not any information regarding load extension etc. Department has charged

penalties, which are wrong. The consumer requested to get my electricity bill set-right and

penalties may be got withdrawn and charged of ACD without any penalties.



During the hearing held on 13/02/2013, the consumer as well as the SDO is present.

The SDO not submitted the reply due to late receipt of complaint and requested for next date.

The Forum has admitted the complaint and the complainant directed to submit fresh test

report whether the load is increased or decreased. The SDO has also directed not to

disconnect the connection till the decision of the case and detailed report be submitted on or

before the next date which is fixed for 13/03/2013.

To-day, the proceedings held on 15/03/2013, the consumer as well as counsel of the

Nigam & CA of the sub-division is present. The consumer again submitted the fresh test report

in which the load shown as 1.706 KW but sanctioned load is 1.900 KW. The SDO write to Sh.

Anand Parkash, JE-1, Area In-charge vide memo No. 4136 dated 19/02/2013 to check the site

and report compliance within 5 days positively. The JE In-charge verify revised test report on

09/03/2013 in which the load was shown as 1.796 KW. As per revised test report of JE, the

account of the consumer has been overhauled and Rs.8100/- has been refunded.

Considering all the facts and reply of SDO, the Forum decided that the energy bill of the

consumer has been overhauled and the grievance of the consumer has been redressed. The

Forum disposed the petition without any cost on either side and case is closed from the Forum.



March, 2013.




Telephone No. 01662-223081 (website: www.dhbvn.com) (e-mail ID: [email protected]) _______________________________________________________

Case No. DH/CGRF-712/2013 Date of Institution: 21.02.2013 Date of Hearing: 06.03.2013 Date of Order: 06.03.2013



In the matter of complaint of Smt. Bimla Devi W/o Sh. Laxmi Narayan, Near Mella

Ground, Sirsa regarding billing problem.


V/s

1.Xen/Op. City Division, DHBVN, Sirsa. 2.SDO/City S/Divn., DHBVN, Sirsa.


Appearance:-

For Complainant: 1.Representative. For the Respondent: 1. Nodal Officer/CGRF

2. SDO/City Sub Divn. Sirsa.



ORDER

Smt. Bimla Devi W/o Sh. Laxmi Naryana, Near Mella Ground, Sirsa have an electricity

connection A/C No. OT12-ST-25-2708 under SDO/City Sub-Divn. DHBVN, Sirsa, hence this

Forum has jurisdiction to hear this complaint.


excess billing.



To-day, the consumer representative as well as SDO is present. The SDO submitted

the reply through Nodal Officer vide memo No. 476 dated 05/03/2013, stating therein that the

meter status shown faulty by HESL Staff and average charged from 05/2007 to 10/2011 and

meter replaced vide MCO No. 95/20023 dated 07/11/2011 final reading 23266, I.R.3. The

difference of final reading charged to consumer account of Rs.76638/- against SC&AR No.

234/95. The consumer has filed complaint in the court of Civil Judge (Sr. Divn.), Sirsa. The

SDO submitted the consumption data from 12/2011 to 2/2013. The consumer also submitted

the photo copy of the order of the civil court which reveals that she has withdrawn the case from

the court of Civil Judge (Sr. Divn.), Sirsa.

Considering all the facts as well as reply of respondent SDO, the Forum decided that the

amount is charged to the consumer for the consumption recorded by the meter, hence the same

is chargeable. The Forum disposed the petition without any cost on either side and case is

closed from the Forum.



March, 2013.



DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar-125 005 Telephone No. 01662-223081 (website: www.dhbvn.com) (e-mail ID: [email protected]) ________________________________________________________________ Case No. DH/CGRF-713/2013 Date of Institution: 05.03.2013

Date of Hearing: 15.03.2013 Date of Order: 15/03/2013


Present:-



In the matter of complaint of Sh. Om Parkash S/o Sh. Tulsi Ram, V&P.O. Milakpur-1,

Tehsil, Narnaund, Distt., Hisar regarding low voltage.


V/s

1. Xen/Operation Division, DHBVN, Hansi.

2.SDO/Op. S/Divn, DHBVN,Narnaund.


Appearance:-


For the Respondent: 1.Nodal Officer/CGRF,DHBVN,Hisar 2.SDO/Op. Sub-Divn.Narnaund.



ORDER

Sh. Om Parkash S/o Sh. Tulsi Ram, V&P.O. Milakpur-1, Tehsil, Narnaund, Distt., Hisar

have got an electricity tube well connection, A/C No. MR-51/0273 under SDO/Op. Sub-Division,

DHBVN, Narnaund, hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint.

The complainant has filed the present complaint stated that he got an electricity tube

well connection with sanctioned load (EOL) of 15 BHP. But the respondent SDO has released

the connection by installing 10 KVA T/F instead of 25 KVA T/F. Due to low capacity T/F, the T/F

was burnt and his tube well is not running. The consumer has requested to replace the existing

T/F of 10 KVA into new 25 KVA T/F but department has not taken any action up-till now.



To-day, the proceedings held on 15/03/2013, the consumer as well as SDO is present.

The SDO submitted reply through Nodal Officer vide memo No. 1849 dated 14/03/2013, stating

therein that the consumer had applied for new connection on dated 29/12/2008 vide App. No.

47784 AP and extended his load 7.5 BHP to 15 BHP on dated 21/04/2011 vide App. No.53880

AP. The 10 KVA T/F was installed under supervision of XEN/Const., Hisar wing and it was

informed and requested that the higher capacity T/F be provided due to extension of load to the

SE/Const., Hisar vide his office memo No.1691 dated 17/05/2012. The copy of SDO reply has

also handed over to the consumer.

After hearing both the parties, the Forum decided that the T/F has been damaged due to

supervisory lapse and negligency of duties, displinary action be taken against the delinquent

officer/official of Nigam. The cost of damaged T/F be recovered from delinquent officer/official

and 25 KVA T/F be installed in place of 10 KVA damaged T/F within week time. The Forum




March, 2013.



DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar-125 005 Telephone No. 01662-223081 (website: www.dhbvn.com) (e-mail ID: [email protected])


Date of Hearing: 15/03/2013 Date of Order: 15/03/2013


Present:-



In the matter of complaint of Sh. Prahlad Rai Modi, H. No. 34, Sector-6P, HUDA Colony,

Hansi, Distt., Hisar regarding false MDI penalty charges.


V/s


2.SDO/Op. City S/Divn, DHBVN, Hansi.


Appearance:-


For the Respondent: 1.Nodal Officer/CGRF,DHBVN,Hisar 2.SDO, City Sub-Divn. Hansi.



Sh. Prahlad Rai Modi S/o Sh. Shiv Dutt Rai, H.No.34, Sector-6P, HUDA

Colony, Hansi, Distt., Hisar have got an electricity connection, A/C No. M-1063/MS & A/C No.

MS/31-0014 under SDO/Op. City Sub-Division, DHBVN, Hansi, hence this Forum has

jurisdiction to hear the complaint.

ORDER

The complainant has filed the present complaint stated that the Nigam had wrong

charged Rs.199858/- vide SDO/Op. S/Divn., Hansi memo No.643 dated 05/05/2003 on account

of MDI penalty due to MDI exceeded during November, 2001 to April, 2003 and non-submission

of revised test report and requested to refund the same.



To-day, the proceedings held on 15/03/2013, the consumer as well as SDO of sub-

division is present. The SDO submitted the reply through Nodal Officer vide memo No. 6955

dated 14/03/2013. A copy of SDO reply has also handed over to the consumer. The SDO

stated that relevant record i.e. ledger, clumsy (reading), sundry register etc. has been destroyed

in flood due to breach in Petwar Distributory allied with City Sub-Divn., Hansi. Moreover, Sh.

Prahlad Rai Modi has already been informed that this matter is 4/2003 and about ten years

passed and record is not available in the office vide XEN/Op. memo No.2311 dt. 23/05/12, so

without record complaint may not be reviewed.

After hearing both the parties, the Forum considering all the facts and reveals that cause

for action had been arises about 10 years ago and as per Sr. No. 8(ii) of HERC Regulation No.

HERC/02/2004 dated 12/04/2004 “Every complaints must be filed in writing in duplicate to the

Chairperson of the Forum by the complainant in Form-1 provided that after one year of

establishment of the Forum, only those complaints filed within one year of its cause for action

shall be entertained by the Forum. In the present case, the cause for action had been arisen 10

years ago, hence the Forum is of view, it is a time barred case, hence dismissed.

The Forum disposed the petition without any cost on either side and case is closed from the

Forum.



March, 2013.






Date of Hearing: 15/03/2013 Date of Order: 15/03/2013.


Present:-



In the matter of complaint of Sh. C.R. Verma S/o Sh. Dev Karan, H. No. 1297, Sector-

13, Hisar regarding wrong billing.


V/s




Appearance:-


For the Respondent: 1.Nodal Officer/CGRF,DHBVN,Hisar 2.Counsel & CA of C/Line Sub-Divn.Hisar.



Sh. C.R. Verma S/o Sh. Dev Karan, H.No. 1297, Sector-13, Hisar have got an electricity

connection, A/C No. EE01-0353 under AGM, Civil Line Sub-Division, DHBVN, Hisar, hence this

Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint.

ORDER

The complainant has filed the present complaint stated that Nigam has issued wrong bill

by showing average 1680 units for the period 10/09/2012 to 09/11/2012. The consumer made a

complaint in CCC, Hisar for correction of his electricity bill. The department manually correct

the bill and asked to deposit Rs.1000/-. The consumer deposited the bill amounting to

Rs.1000/-. Again and again, the department issued wrong billing and requested the Forum to

correct his bill.



To-day, the proceedings held on 15/03/2013, the consumer as well as counsel of the

Nigam & CA of the sub-division is present. The SDO submitted the reply through Nodal Officer

vide memo No. Spl-1 dated 15/03/2013, stating therein that the account of the consumer is

overhauled and Rs.2251/- is only recoverable from the consumer. A copy of SDO reply is

handed over to the consumer along with correct bill copy and the consumer is also agreed with

the reply of SDO and he is satisfied.

Considering all the facts and reply of SDO, the Forum decided that the energy bill of the

consumer has been overhauled and the grievance of the consumer has been redressed and

consumer is also satisfied. The Forum disposed the petition without any cost on either side and

case is closed from the Forum.



March, 2013.






Date of Hearing: 15/03/2013 Date of Order: 15/03/2013.


Present:-



In the matter of complaint of Sh. Suresh Kumar S/o Sh. Rameshwar, Village Rajthal,

Tehsi, Narnaund, Distt., Hisar regarding tube well connection.


V/s


2. SDO/Op. S/Divn., DHBVN, Narnaund.


Appearance:-


For the Respondent: 1.Nodal Officer/CGRF,DHBVN,Hisar 2.SDO of Sub-Divn.Narnaund.



Sh. Suresh Kumar S/o Sh. Rameshwar, Village, Rajthal, Tehsil, Narnaund, Distt., Hisar

have applied for tube well connection vide application No. 55358/AP under SDO/Op. Sub-

Division, DHBVN, Narnaund, hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint.

ORDER

The complainant has filed the present complaint stated that he applied for tube well

connection and security deposited on 29/07/2012 with the Nigam under self execution scheme

but the Nigam has not released his tube well connection up-till now.



To-day, the proceedings held on 15/03/2013, the consumer is not present but the SDO

is present. The SDO submitted the reply through Nodal Officer vide memo No. 1862 dated

14/03/2013 stating therein that the applicant had applied for tube well connection on dated

27/07/2012 vide A&A No. 55358/AP under self execution scheme. The applicant has

erected/completed his electric line and Nigam has provided the D/Transformer. The applicant

has also submitted an affidavit that his work has been completed and he has no complaint with

the Nigam.

Considering all the facts and reply of SDO, the Forum observed that the grievance of

the consumer has been redressed. The Forum disposed the petition without any cost on either

side and case is closed from the Forum.



March, 2013.





Case No. DH/CGRF-706/2013 Date of Institution: 26.01.2013 Date of Hearing: 26.02.2013&

24.05.2013 Date of Order:24.05.2013



In the matter of complaint of Sh. Nityananda Pradhan, Gali No.7, Shyam Colony, Near Durga Builder Main Gate, Sehatpur, Faridabad regarding wrong billing.


V/s

1. Xen/Operation Division, DHBVN, Old Faridabad. 2. SDO/Operation S/Divn., Mathura Road, DHBVN, Faridabad..


Appearance:-


2. CA of Sub Divn. M/Road, Faridabad



ORDER Sh. Nityananda Pradhan, Gali No.7, Shyam Colony, Near Durga Builder Main Gate,

Sehatpur, Faridabad have an electricity connection A/C No. TD11/3322 under SDO/Op.

Sub-Divn. Mathura Road, DHBVN, Faridabad, hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear

this complaint.

The consumer has filed the present complaint stating therein that his electricity

meter was burnt and deposited Rs.6000/- out of outstanding bill of Rs.10026/- as full and

final settlement. After depositing the final bill of Rs.6000/- the Nigam has again raised a bill

of Rs.77254/- vide energy bill No. 174623 dated 04/02/2012for which he has made

representation on dated 22/02/2012, but no action has been taken by the department. The

consumer requested the Forum to correct the bill so that the same could be deposited in

time.

The complaint was entertained and forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the

Nigam’s version and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum for hearing

the case on 26/02/2013 at Faridabad.

During the proceedings held at Faridabad on 26/02/2013, the consumer as well as

the respondent SDO is present. The SDO requested for next date. Request granted. The

Forum directed the SDO as well as Nodal Officer to submit the reply within 7 days for

finalizing the case on merits. The case is adjourned for next date.

To-day, the consumer as well as CA of the sub division is present. The SDO

submitted reply through Nodal Officer vide his office memo No.810 dated 24/05/2013,

stating therein that the premises of Nitya Nand had been checked in the presence of Smt.

Raj Shree by checking team of Sh. Sadh Ram JE on dated 03/02/2011 vide LL-1 No.

08/2079. The consumer was using direct supply at his premises. His office has charged

theft penalty amounting to Rs.85,865/- vide sundry item No. 75/R88. A copy of SDO reply

has also been handed over to the consumer.

After going through the case file, the information/documents supplied by the appellant

as well as by the respondent on the date of hearing and discussion held during the course

of hearing in the case, this Forum has decided/concluded that this is a theft case of

electricity, which is not falls in the jurisdiction of this Forum and dismissed. The Forum




May, 2013.





_______________________________________________________ Case No. DH/CGRF-708/2013 Date of Institution: 12.02.2013 Date of Hearing: 26.02.2013&

24.05.2013 Date of Order: 24.05.2013



In the matter of complaint of Sh. Pawan Kumar Gupta, C/583, Anuradha Clinic, 27 Foot Road, Dabua Colony, NIT, Faridabad regarding refund of security deposits of electricity meter.


V/s

1. Xen/Operation Division, DHBVN, NIT Faridabad. 2. SDO/Operation S/Divn., No.2,, DHBVN, NIT Faridabad..


Appearance:-

For Complainant: 1.None. For the Respondent: 1. Nodal Officer/CGRF

2. SDO/OP Sub Divn. No.2, NIT Faridabad



ORDER

Sh. Pawan Kumar Gupta, C/583, Anuradha Clinic, 27 Foot Road, Dabua Colony, NIT Faridabbad have an electricity connection A/C No. 22-0328 & CC21-0196 under SDO/Op. Sub-Divn. No.2, DHBVN, NIT Faridabad, hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear this complaint.

The consumer has filed the present complaint in which the consumer demanding refund of security deposits against electricity meter, but the department has taken no action. The consumer requested for refund of security deposits against electricity meter.

The complaint was entertained and forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the Nigam’s version and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum for hearing the case on 26/02/2013 at Faridabad.

During the proceedings held at Faridabad on 26/02/2013, the consumer as well as the respondent SDO is present. The SDO submitted the reply vide memo No.1085 dated 25/02/2013 stating that this office has made a correspondence with the consumer by his office memo No.878 dated 11/01/2013 vide which the consumer was intimated that his bill has been rectified and asked to provide the acknowledgement of the application through which he has applied for refund of security and consumer was also asked to make it clear whether the the information of whole DHBVN or particularly of this office is required, but the consumer neither provide the acknowledgement nor he made his office clear about which information he required. It is also added that the consumer has provided the original BA16 receipt on dated 19/02/2013 and the ACD is adjusted vide SC&AR No.100/R-57 in his another relevant A/C No. CC31/2102. The copy of reply of SDO is handed over to the consumer.

After considering the facts, the Forum directed the respondent SDO to submit the proper reply in details within 15 days positively, so that the case may be decided on merits. The case is adjourned for the next date.

To-day, the proceedings held at Faridabad on 24/05/2013, the consumer is not present but the SDO is present. The SDO submitted reply through Nodal Officer vide memo No.1389 dated 23/05/2013, stating therein that the grievance of the consumer has already been redressed by his office and the same is intimated to both, your office and the consumer through his office memo No. 1228 dated 22.03.2013 and the consumer has also submitted his consent showing redressal of his grievances.

After going through the case file, the information/documents supplied by the appellant as well as by the respondent on the date of hearing and discussion held during the course of hearing in the case, this Forum has decided/concluded that as per SDO reply as well as consumer consent, the grievance of the consumer has been redressed and the case is closed from this Forum. The Forum disposed the petition without any cost on either side and case is closed from the Forum.

File be consigned to record. Given under my hand on this day of 24th

May, 2013.

(R.N.Garg) (S.C.Aggarwal)

Member Member



Date of Hearing: 15.03.2013&22.05.2013 Date of Order: 28.05.2013


Present:-



In the matter of complaint of Sh. Joginder Kumar S/o Sh. Kanhiya Lal, H.No.292,

Sector-13, Hisar regarding wrong billing.


V/s




Appearance:-


For the Respondent: 1.Nodal Officer/CGRF,DHBVN,Hisar 2.Counsel & CA of C/Line Sub-

Divn.Hisar.



ORDER

Sh. Joginder Kumar S/o Sh. Kanhiya Lal, H.No.292, Sector-13, Hisar have got an

electricity connection, A/C No. EE01-0282 under AGM, Civil Line Sub-Division, DHBVN,

Hisar, hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint.

The complainant has filed the present complaint stated that old energy meter was

jumped and the consumer had made a complaint that his energy meter is jumping day by

day. The department has changed the meter and old meter checked from the M&T lab and

found that the meter is within permissible limit.

The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the Nigam’s version and

both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on 13/03/2013 at Hisar for further

hearing.

During the proceedings held on 15/03/2013, the consumer as well as counsel of the

Nigam & CA of the sub-division is present. The SDO submitted the reply through Nodal

Officer vide memo No.4390 dated 14/03/2013, stating therein that as per the rules and bye

laws of electricity act, it is not possible to the answering defendants to overhaul the account

on the basis of new meter, hence complaint is liable to be dismissed.

Considering all the facts and reply of SDO, the Forum directed the respondent SDO

to submit the consumption data for the last two years and up-to-date. The case is

adjourned for next date.

The proceedings held on 22/05/2013 at Hisar, the consumer as well as counsel of

the Nigam & CA of the sub-division is present. The CA & counsel has not submitted the

reply. The Forum has directed the Nodal Officer to obtain the detailed reply i.e. site

verification, load and accuracy of meter within 3 days so that case may be decided on

merits.

Now the SDO submitted the reply vide his office memo No. 5328 dated 27/05/2013

by enclosing the LL-1 and consumption data. In the earlier one, it was mentioned that

accuracy of the meter found within permissible limit, hence the account overhauled by the

SDO on the basis of actual consumption recorded by the meter is in order.

After going through the case file, the information/documents supplied by the

appellant as well as by the respondent on various date of hearing and discussion held

during the course of hearing in the case, this Forum has decided/concluded that the

account of the consumer is overhauled by the SDO on the basis of actual consumption

recorded by the meter is in order. The Forum disposed the petition without any cost on




May, 2013.




Date of Hearing: 22.05.2013 Date of Order: 22.05.2013


Present:-



In the matter of complaint of Sh. M.S. Chauhan S/o Sh. Sewa Singh, M/s IDEA

Mobile Company Ltd., Camp Office, SCO No.14, 2nd


Floor, Sector-8, UE, Karnal-132001

regarding wrong billing.

V/s




Appearance:-



Divn.Hisar.



ORDER

Sh. M.S. Chauhan S/o Sh. Dewa Singh, SCO No. 14, 2nd

The complainant has filed the present complaint stated that the bills of the A/C No.

K-411/0990, JJF-21/1828, QQ-21/1680, QQ-21/1791 & UE-21/1557 were deposited with

the Nigam but are not posted in the accounts by SDO, Civil Line S/Divn., DHBVN, Hisar

despite repeated requests and representations to the respondents and requested for

posting the amount in the accounts refund the surcharge on the un-posted amounts and

clear the arrears from the bills.

Floor, Sector-8, UE,

Karnal have got an electricity connection, A/C No. K411/0990, ZZ21/0174 & other A/C No.

as mentioned in the complaint under AGM, Civil Line Sub-Division, DHBVN, Hisar, hence

this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint.


both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on 10/04/2013 at Hisar for hearing

of the case.

To-day, the proceedings held on 22/05/2013, the consumer is not present but the

counsel of the Nigam & CA of the sub-division is present. The SDO submitted the point-

wise reply through Nodal Officer vide memo No.4689 dated 12/04/2013, stating therein

that;

1. That the contents of para No. 1 of the complaint as stated are wrong, not admitted and

is denied. Complainant be directed to prove the same.

2. That the contents of para No. 2 of the complaint are matter of record.

3. That the contents of para No. 3 of the complaint are matter of record.

4. That the contents of para No.4 of the complaint as stated is wrong and hence denied. It

is pertinent to mention here that the amount deposited has been posted in respective

accounts with surcharge. As per account statement now the complainant is liable to

make the payments to the answering respondents as shown in the account statement.

5. That the contents of para No.5 of the complaint as stated is wrong and hence denied.

However, now the accounts of the complainant have been overhauled.

6. That the contents of para No.6 of the complaint as stated is wrong.

7. That the contents of para No.7 of the complaint is wrong, not admitted and is denied.

8. That the contents of para No.8 of the complaint is wrong not admitted and is denied. It

is pertinent to mention here that the amount deposited has been posted in respective

account with surcharge. As per detailed account statement, the complainant is liable to

make the payments of Rs.1,18,832/- to the answering respondents. Hence the

complaint is liable to be dismissed.

9. That the contents of para No.9 of the application is matter of record.

In view of the above submissions, complaint of the complainant may kindly be

dismissed with costs.

-: 2 :-


appellant as well as by the respondent on date of hearing and discussion held during the

course of hearing in the case, this Forum has decided/concluded that the Forum disposed

the petition without any cost on either side and case is closed from the Forum.


Given under my hand on this day of 22nd

May, 2013.





Case No. DH/CGRF-721/2013 Date of Institution: 13.03.2013 Date of Hearing: 24.05.2013 Date of Order:24.05.2013



In the matter of complaint of Smt. Dharmawati W/o Sh. Ram Lal Yadav, Old Faridabad regarding highly inflated bills.


V/s

1. Xen/Operation Division, DHBVN, Old Faridabad. 2. SDO/Operation S/Divn., Tilpat, Mathura Road, DHBVN, Faridabad..


Appearance:-


2. CC of Sub Divn., Faridabad



ORDER

Smt. Dharamwati W/o Sh. Ram Lal Yadav, Old Faridabad have an electricity

connection A/C No. PP14-2350 under SDO/Op. Sub-Divn. Tilpat, DHBVN, Faridabad,

hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear this complaint.

The consumer has filed the present complaint stating therein that the amount

demanded in the bills is beyond my financial position. Further more, I am not using any

gadget except a small wattage lamp at night for lighting purposes. The consumption shown

in the bills is inflated and faulty.

1. Bill No.17280230 Rs. 1207-00

2. Bill No. 21003884 Rs. 2989-00

The consumer requested the Forum to correct her bills.




To-day, the proceedings held at Faridabad on 24/05/2013, the consumer is not

present but the CC of the sub division is present. The representative of the SDO submitted

reply through Nodal Officer vide his office memo No.62 dated 18/04/2013, stating therein

that the consumer bill was issued on ‘N’ code basis in the month of 08/2011 to 12/2011.

The consumer bill is already adjusted for the month of 02/2012 by computer cell ‘N’ Code

for the month of 08/2011 to 02/2012 of Rs.3977/- refund. The consumer was not paid her

bill since last 1 year, last payment made by the consumer was Rs.1219/- on dated

23/04/2012, hence there is no any dispute in her bill.



of hearing in the case, this Forum has decided/concluded that bills of the consumer is

overhauled and grievance of the consumer has been redressed. The Forum disposed the




May, 2013.





_______________________________________________________ Case No. DH/CGRF-722/2013

Date of Institution: 13.03.2013 Date of Hearing: 24.05.2013 Date of Order:24.05.2013



In the matter of complaint of Sh. Tirlok Gupta, H.No.8, Gali No.2, Bhoor Colony, Faridabad City-121002 regarding wrong billing.


V/s

1. Xen/Operation Division, DHBVN, Old Faridabad. 2. SDO/Operation S/Divn. (West), DHBVN, Faridabad..


Appearance:-


2. CA of Sub Divn. (West), Faridabad



ORDER Sh. Tirlok Gupta, H. No.8, Gali No.2, Bhoor Colony, Faridabad City have got an

electricity connection A/C No. MM12-0950 under SDO/Op. Sub-Divn.(West), DHBVN,

Faridabad, hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear this complaint.

The consumer has filed the present complaint stating therein that the respondent

Nigam has issued bill on average basis. But my house is closed from 18/02/2013 and he

will not be consumed any electricity and request for MMC billing.




To-day, the proceedings held at Faridabad on 24/05/2013, the consumer is not

present but the CA of the sub division is present. The representative of the SDO submitted

reply through Nodal Officer vide his office memo No.313 dated 04/04/2013, stating therein

that the consumer bill issued on average basis from 05/2011 to 01/2013 due to wrong MCO

punched in consumer A/c. The meter was replaced of A/C No.MM13-0650 but wrongly

punched MM13-0950 by his office due to clerical mistake. Now consumer bill has been

rectified up to reading 42839 as per reading verified by area JE & adjusted/refunded of

Rs.31604/- vide SC&AR No. 247/R157 and account has been settled and no dispute in this

bill.



of hearing in the case, this Forum has decided/concluded that bills of the consumer is

overhauled as per reading and Rs.31604/- has been adjusted/refunded vide SC&AR

No.247/157R and grievance of the consumer has been redressed. The Forum disposed the




May, 2013.




_______________________________________________________ Case No. DH/CGRF-724/2013 Date of Institution: 21.03.2013 Date of Hearing: 24.05.2013 Date of Order:24.05.2013



In the matter of complaint of Sh. Chun Chun Jha, 280, Friends Colony, Old Faridabad regarding wrong billing.


V/s

1. Xen/Operation Division, Sector-15, DHBVN, Faridabad. 2. SDO/Operation S/Divn. (West), Sector-18, DHBVN, Old Faridabad..


Appearance:-

For Complainant: 1.Representative. For the Respondent: 1. Nodal Officer/CGRF

2. CA of Sub Divn., Faridabad



ORDER

Sh. Chun Chun Jha, H.No.280, Friends Colony, Old Faridabad have an electricity

connection A/C No. CC12-1311 under SDO/Op. Sub-Divn. (West), Sector-18, DHBVN, Old

Faridabad, hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear this complaint.

The consumer has filed the present complaint stating therein that his previous

average monthly consumption is approx. 150 to 200 units. But for the month of Nov., 2012

& Dec., 2012, he got an invoice of 3000 units consumption and new meter reading was

6436 but when he checked his meter it was still 6221. After that for the month of Jan.,

2013 & Feb., 2013, he got an invoice amounting Rs.620/- with ‘0’ units consumption. It

clearly shows the unethical work is being done in the department and requested for do the

needful against the aforesaid invoice.




To-day, the proceedings held at Faridabad on 24/05/2013, the consumer

representative as well as CA of the sub division is present. The representative of the SDO

submitted reply through Nodal Officer vide his office memo No.344 dated 15/04/2013,

stating therein that the consumer bill was issued only charged MMC during month 03/2013.

The new reading has recorded by HESL i.e. same 6436. Now, costumer meter has verified

from Sh. Kuldeep Singh, JE being area in-charge dated 08/04/2013, during checking

reading found 6946 impulse glowing all seals intact. So consumer meter is OK. This

reading has been recorded to next billing & MMC may be adjustable which adjustment is

after next coming bill.



of hearing in the case, this Forum has decided/concluded that the bill for the next month will

be issued on the basis of reading recorded by the meter after adjustment of MMC charged

during previous month, hence the grievance of the consumer has been redressed. The

Forum disposed the petition without any cost on either side and case is closed from the

Forum.



May, 2013.







Present:-



In the matter of complaint of Smt. Neelam Chawla W/o Sh. Parmod Chawla, H. No.

382, Sector-13, Hisar regarding wrong billing.


V/s




Appearance:-

For Complainant: 1.Representative


Divn.Hisar.



ORDER

Smt. Neelam Chawla W/o Sh. Parmod Chawla, H.No. 382, Sector-13, Hisar have got an

electricity connection, A/C No. EE-01-1206 under AGM, Civil Line Sub-Division, DHBVN, Hisar,

hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint.

The complainant has filed the present complaint stated that she had got electricity bills 500-

600 units. In November, 2012, her electricity meter suddenly jumped or stopped. After that she had

got bill for 3224 units. The complainant has reported complaint on Costumer Care Centre. On

complaint, a Lineman had checked the meter and report that the meter of the consumer is O.K. The

consumer again reported that her meter has jumped. The respondent has agreed for installing MTO

and made MTO receipt No. 190388. After one month, the respondent has come for installing MTO

but they checked the meter and found that the meter is dead. The respondent had removed the

meter and installed new meter. Again the Nigam has issued bill for March, 2013 amounting to

Rs.25513/- which is wrong and requested for its correction.

The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the Nigam’s version and both the

parties were asked to appear before the Forum on 10/04/2013 at Hisar for hearing of the case.

To-day, the proceedings held on 22/05/2013, the consumer representative as well as the

counsel of the Nigam & CA of the sub-division is present. The SDO submitted the point-wise reply

through Nodal Officer vide memo No.4689 dated 12/04/2013, stating therein that;

1. That the contents mentioned in the complaint as stated are wrong, not admitted and is

denied. It is pertinent to mention here that a complaint was registered by Sh. Neelam

Chawla on 08/11/2012 for testing of Meter, upon that complaint meter was checked and

MCO was issued on 16/11/2012 which was got effected on 04/12/2012 and meter working

found dead stop with a final reading 15393.

2. That on 18/01/2013 consumer registered a complaint for overhaul the account. After

receiving the complaint, account was overhauled vide sundry item No. 361/92 and Rs.4129/-

has been refunded in the account of complainant as per Sale Instruction No. 4.14. Now the

complaint is liable to pay Rs.22514/- actual energy charges up to 04/03/2013. Hence, the

complaint is liable to be dismissed.

In view of the above submissions, complaint of the complainant may kindly be dismissed

with costs. A copy of SDO reply is also handed over to the consumer.

After going through the case file, the information/documents supplied by the appellant as

well as by the respondent on date of hearing and discussion held during the course of hearing in the

case, this Forum has decided/concluded that account for the month 09/2012 to 12/2012 be

overhauled as per SMI and case is closed from this Forum. The Forum disposed the petition without

any cost on either side and case is closed from the Forum.



May, 2013.






Present:-



In the matter of complaint of Sh. Puran Chand S/o Sh. Pritam Lal, Shop No. 14,

Palika Bazar, Hisar regarding wrong billing.


V/s


2.AEE, City CCC, Double Phatak, DHBVN, Hisar.


Appearance:-


For the Respondent: 1.Nodal Officer/CGRF,DHBVN,Hisar 2.AEE, City CCC, D/Phatak, Hisar.



ORDER

Sh. Puran Chand S/o Sh. Pritam Lal, Shop No. 14, Palika Bazar, Hisar have got an

electricity connection, A/C No. SN21-0484 under AEE, City, CCC, Double Phatak, DHBVN,

Hisar, hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint.

The complainant has filed the present complaint stated that he made a small shop.

The Nigam has issued bill amounting to Rs.7,29,249/- from 10/2012 for 26113 units which

is wrong and requested for correction his wrong bill.



of the case.

To-day, the proceedings held on 22/05/2013, the consumer as well as SDO of the

sub-division is present. The SDO submitted the point-wise reply through Nodal Officer vide

his office memo No.Spl-1 dated 07/05/2013, stating therein that;

1. That it is true that the complainant is bonafide consumer of the Nigam bearing A/C

No. SN21-0484.

2. That during the month of 10/2012, a bill of 77684 units was supplied to the

consumer.

3. That on dated 12/10/2012, consumer’s premises was checked by Sh. Pardeep

Dhull, SDO along with the checking team vide LL-1 No. 22/456. As per LL-1 meter

particular are meter Sr. No. HRH-13287. Make Secure, Cap. 10-60 and Reading-

85334 and meter was sent to Lab for further checking.

4. Meter was sent to Lab and as per M&T Lab report meter particulars are: Meter Sr.

No. HRH-13287, Make Secure, Cap. 10-60 and Readiang-85334.

5. As per M&T Lab report both M&T seals bearing Sr. No. GM814808.09 found

tempered and reaffixed with some adhesive and an external electronic circuit

(Remote) found inside the meter. Therefore, as per Sales Circular No. D-43/2007, it

is a case of theft of energy but consumption being higher than the assessed units.

Therefore, the amount was not charged.

6. Therefore, as the M&T Lab did not reported any jump or any fast working of meter.

So considering the meter reading, recorded at the time of checking and also verified

by M&T Lab, the consumer has to pay the all recorded reading.

Therefore, it is prayed that the complaint of the complainant may kindly be ordered

to be dismissed and ordered to complainant to pay the amount up to final recorded reading.

A copy of SDO reply is also handed over to the consumer.

-: 2 :-



course of hearing in the case, this Forum has decided/concluded that it is a case of theft of

energy and does not falls within the scope of this Forum, hence the case is dismissed. The

Forum disposed the petition without any cost on either side and case is closed from the

Forum.



May, 2013.






Present:-



In the matter of complaint of Sh. Rajesh Kumar S/o Sh. Rajvir Singh, H.No.S-18,

Saket Colony, Azad Nagar, Hisar regarding wrong billing.


V/s




Appearance:-



Divn.Hisar.



ORDER

Sh. Rajesh Kumar S/o Sh. Rajvir Singh, H. No. S-18, Saket Colony, Azad Nagar,

Hisar have got an electricity connection, A/C No. STTM-4393 under AGM, Civil Line Sub-

Division, DHBVN, Hisar, hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint.

The complainant has filed the present complaint stated that;

1. I got temporary connection during 2011 with a security deposit of Rs.4258/-. Initial

reading in the meter was 2. I want construction a house. I can’t start the construction

work due to some reason. Hence, my electric meter is not in use. However, I paid @

minimum charges for 0 reading. I paid monthly bills regularly.

2. On 18 March, 2013, I applied for PDCO. During April, 2013, I visited to office regarding

PDCO and refund of my security deposit. The staff issued me duplicate bill of

Rs.4838/- for new readings 449 and old reading 2. I said to the staff that I am not using

the electricity and my request was for PDCO. This is an error, then the bill was

corrected as Rs.1200/- instead of Rs.4838/- and issued me duly signed and stamped.

But it was not except at present which was not understood. I write an application to

Nodal Officer for necessary action, he saying that I can’t do anything for this. Secondly

I write a petition to AEE, Civil Lines, Customer Care Centre, DHBVN, Rajgarh Road,

Hisar and copy to all concerned. No fruitful result received till date.

3. Lastly, I am apply by Consumer Complaint Form to Forum of Redressal of Consumer

Grievance. It is, therefore, prayed for settlement the same order to the concern that as

I am not faulty. Only reasonable amount can be deduct and refund the balance amount

of security deposit, so that I am not feeling harassment.



of the case.

To-day, the proceedings held on 22/05/2013, the consumer as well as the counsel

of the Nigam & CA of the sub-division is present. The SDO submitted the point-wise reply

through Nodal Officer vide memo No.Spl-2 dated 22/05/2013, stating therein that;

4. That the contents of para No. 1 of the complaint are matter of record. However,

complainant be directed to prove the same strictly.

5. That the contents of para No. 2 of the complaint as stated are wrong, not admitted and

is denied. It is pertinent to mention here that complainant had deposit the ACD

Rs.4000/- which is refundable after deduction of the legitimate dues of the Nigam.

6. That the contents of para No.3 of the complaint are admitted to the extent that on

18/03/2013 complainant had applied for PDCO and rests of the contents as stated are

wrong, not admitted and is denied. It is pertinent to mention here on the request of

complainant PDCO was executed and after deduction of actual consumption charges

Rs.1037/- is outstanding against the complainant. It is pertinent to mention here on the

date of PDCO reading was record 449 and working of meter found O.K. Hence, the

-: 2 :-

complainant is liable to pay the amount of Rs.1037/- up to 17/05/2013 as per rules

of the Nigam.

1. That the contents of para No.4 of the complaint as stated are wrong and is denied.

It is pertinent to mention here that after the deduction of ACD now the complainant

is liable to pay Rs.1037/- up to 17/05/2013 along with surcharge as per rules of the

Nigam which are actual consumption charges. Complainant be directed to clear the

dues of the Nigam. Hence, complaint is liable to be dismissed.

In view of the above submissions, complaint of the complainant may kindly be

dismissed with costs.



course of hearing in the case, this Forum has decided/concluded that the chargeable

amount charged by the respondent SDO is in order. A copy of SDO reply is also handed

over to the consumer. The Forum disposed the petition without any cost on either side and

case is closed from the Forum.



May, 2013.








In the matter of complaint of Sh. Kavi Jain, 62, Basement B-III, Charmwood Village, Faridabad regarding inflated electricity bill.


V/s

1. Xen/Operation Division, DHBVN, Old Faridabad. 2. SDO/Operation S/Divn., Mathura Road, DHBVN, Faridabad..


Appearance:-


2. CA of Sub Divn., Faridabad



ORDER Sh. Kavi Jain S/o Sh., G.L.Jain, 62, Basement, B-III, Charmwood Village, Faridabad

have got an electricity connection A/C No. EG-12-2430 under SDO/Op. Sub-Divn. Mathura

Road, DHBVN, Faridabad, hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear this complaint.

The consumer has filed the present complaint stating therein that he used the

premises as a store for the past 5 years. There is hardly any consumption of electricity, but

he has been getting bills with high consumption. Suddenly, his bill starts coming Rs.4434.

The consumer requested since the consumption is minimum, the bill charged to him should

also be on the minimum basis and get the correction done and adjusted his payments in

the future bills.




To-day, the proceedings held at Faridabad on 24/05/2013, the consumer as well as

CA of the sub division is present. The representative of the SDO submitted reply through

Nodal Officer vide his office memo No.809 dated 24/05/2013, stating therein that for the

month of 04/2012 meter reading taken wrongly as 14300 KWH, the account was issued

wrong bill according to the bogus readings taken by the meter reader Sh. Harun Khan, his

explanation has been called by his office vide office memo No. 761 dated 22/05/2013.

Account of the consumer has also been overhauled vide SC&AR No.171/R110 and

adjusted/refunded the amount Rs.1,30,106/-. The balance amount which the consumer

has to pay is Rs.6110/-. Supply of the consumer was disconnected for non-payment vide

TDCO No. 1/009 dated 17/04/2013. A copy of SDO reply has also been handed over to

the consumer.



of hearing in the case, this Forum has decided/concluded that accounts of the consumer is

overhauled and grievance of the consumer has been redressed. The Forum disposed the




May, 2013.








In the matter of complaint of Sh. Kishan Dutt Sharma, H. No. 307, Sector-9, Faridabad regarding interruption failure of power supply and shifting of connection from Rural Feeder to Urban Feeder.


V/s

1. Xen/Operation Division, DHBVN, Ballabgarh. 2. SDO/Operation S/Divn., DHBVN, Badrola.


Appearance:-


2. SDO of Sub Divn., Badrola.



ORDER Sh. Kishan Dutt Sharma S/o Sh. Devi Ram, H.No.307, Sector-9, Faridabad have got an

electricity connection, A/C No. MD31-0011 with sanctioned load of 19.97 KW connected with Rural

feeder since 29th

The complainant has filed the present complaint stated that he is facing a lot of problem in

running this unit because of power problems being in rural area. The complainant requested to

connect his unit from rural feeder to Urban Feeder. The distance of Urban feeder from his unit is only

300 meters.

March, 2007 under SDO/Op.Sub-Division, DHBVN, Badrola, hence this Forum has

jurisdiction to hear the complaint.

The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the Nigam’s version and both the

parties were asked to appear before the Forum on 04/06/2013 at Faridabad for further hearing.

To-day, the consumer as well as the respondent SDO is present. The SDO submitted reply

through his Nodal Officer vide memo No. 747 dated 29/05/2013, stating therein that the consumer

premises bearing A/C No. MD31/0011 is related to Village Badoli in Pansir Colony and its supply is

running from 11KV Kheri Rural Feeder of S/Divn., Kheri Kalan 66KV S/Stn. A-4 Sec-18, Faridabad.

As the consumer desired its supply from Sector-9 Feeder which is under the Judicial area of

SDO/Op. S/Divn., I/Area, Sector-6 Faridabad. At the time of releasing of connection to above

consumer, the supply was running from 11KV Mirajpur Disposal Rural Feeder feed from 220KV

S/Stn. At A-5, Sector-3, Ballabgarh. Right now, supply of the Pansir Colony Vill. Badoli shifted from

220KV S/Stn. A-5. Ballabgarh, S/Divn. Badrola to 11KV Kheri Rural Feeder due to providing HVDS

system in village-Badoli. The respondent SDO has submitted Sales Circular No.D-21/2005 dated

18/10/2005 for shifting of Industrial load from rural to urban feeder and further vide Sales Circular

No. D-29/2005 dated 25/11/2005 vide letter No. Ch-2/SE/Comml./R-16/341/05 dated 07/01/2013

issued by the CE/Comml. regarding i) shifting of industrial load from rural to urban feeder, ii) release

of Industrial connection from urban feeder instead of rural feeder whereas rural feeder is near to the

premises of industrial units reviewed and decided by the Nigam as under:

“NDS/industrial connection having load 20 KW and above is allowed to be shifted/released from

RDS AP feeder to Urban KW on LT/CT metering”

After hearing both the parties, the Forum decided and directed to the respondent SDO to get

the case approved from competent authority personally and connection be shifted from Rural Feeder

to Urban Feeder within 15 days positively. The consumer is also directed to install LT/CT meter

immediately for shifting his connection from rural feeder to urban feeder. The Forum disposed the




June, 2013.


Date post:	07-Jul-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	nguyenmien
View:	220 times
Download:	0 times

FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN … · FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER...

Documents