Case No. DH/CGRF- 2138/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: Date of Order:

Save this PDF as:
 WORD  PNG  TXT  JPG

Size: px
Start display at page:

Download "Case No. DH/CGRF- 2138/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: Date of Order:"

Transcription

1 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2138/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: Date of Order: Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: 1 K.D.Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman 2 Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of complaint of Smt. Santosh Devi, House No. 663, Village Sohansara, Near Post Office, Distt Bhiwani regarding wrong billing... Complainant/Petitioner V/s 1 Xen (OP) S/U Division, DHBVN, Bhiwani 2 SDO (OP) DHBVN, Loharu Appearance:-.Respondents For Complainant: None For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer/CGRF, DHBVN, Hisar 2 Respondent SDO

2 ORDER Smt. Santosh Devi, House No. 663, Village Sohansara, Near Post Office, Distt Bhiwani has got an electricity connection bearing account no. HZ1D-0665 under SDO (OP) DHBVN, Loharu, hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. The complainant has filed the present complaint stating therein that wrong bill are issued to her without taking any reading and readings are recorded arbitrarily. She has requested to the forum to redress her complaint. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Bhiwani for hearing of the case. Proceedings of the case were held at Bhiwani on Complainant was not present whereas respondent SDO was present. The respondent SDO filed written reply vide No. 803 dated stating therein that premises of the complainant was checked and reading was found to be KWH. The bill of complainant has already been corrected vide SC&AR No. 73/709 amounting to Rs. 6696/- SDO also placed on record copy of sundry vide which correction has been made in the bill. After going through the record on case file and hearing the parties, the Forum decides to dispose of the complaint as complaint of complainant has already been redressed. Case is closed. Both the parties to bear their own costs. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 16 th May, (K.D.Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

3 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2156/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: Date of Order: Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: 1 K.D.Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman 2 Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of complaint of Sh. Shri Chand S/o Mangtu Ram Vill.& P.O. Barwas Teh.Loharu Distt.Bhiwani regarding Change of Name... Complainant/Petitioner V/s 1 Xen (OP) S/U Division, DHBVN, Bhiwani 2 SDO (OP) DHBVN, Loharu Appearance:-.Respondents For Complainant: Present For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer/CGRF, DHBVN, Hisar 2 Respondent SDO

4 ORDER Sh. Shri Chand S/o Mangtu Ram Vill.& P.O. Barwas Teh.Loharu Distt.Bhiwani has got electricity connection bearing account no. BE (Old Account No. G-209) under Op Sub Div. Loharu. hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. The complainant has filed the present complaint stating therein that there is a t/well connection exiting in their common land in the name of Sh. Shri Niwash S/o Sh. Sheo karan. T/well was sold to him and sale deed was signed. Before completing other formalities Sh. Shri niwash and both his sons died. Widow of Sh. Shri Niwash and his daughter in laws are ready to complete the formalities regarding the change of T/well connection. He requested the forum to get the name changed. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Bhiwani for hearing of the case. Proceedings of the case were held at Bhiwani on Complainant & respondent SDO were present. The respondent SDO filed written reply vide No. 804 dated stating therein that the complainant applied for change of name of exiting t/well connection in the name of Sh. Shri niwash vide application No B22-318/59. He also submitted a Jamabandi for the year for khewat No. 282 and 292 khatoni No. 296 alongwith the application. But the Jamawandi does not have the name of Sh. Shri niwah. As such the applicant failed to prove his coownership with Shri Niwash. In the absence of coownership proof change of name cannot be effected. Complainant stated that at the time of Intkal due to mistake Ram niwah has been added in jamabandi in place of Sh. Shri Niwash. After going through the record on case file and hearing the parties, the Forum decides to dispose of the complaint as there is no merit in the complaint of the complainant as he failed to prove coownership with sh. Shri niwash. Case is closed. Both the parties to bear their own costs. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 16May, (K.D.Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

5 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2121/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: Date of Order: Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: 1 K.D.Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman 2 Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of complaint of Sh Pardeep Pawaria, HN G-1-240, Indra Enclave, Sector 21-D, Faridabad regarding wrong charging.. Complainant/Petitioner V/s 1 XEN (OP) Divn. DHBVN, Old Faridabad 2 SDO (OP) Sub Divn-4, DHBVN, Faridabad Appearance:- For Complainant: Present.Respondents For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer CGRF Hisar. 2 Respondent SDO

6 ORDER Sh Pardeep Pawaria, H.N. G-1-240, Indra Enclave, Sector 21-D,Faridabad has got an electricity connection bearing account No under (OP) Sub-Division, DHBVN-4 Faridabad hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. The complainant has filed the present complaint stating therein that he is not receiving electricity bill at his resident also meter reading are not taken by DHBVN he is being charge on average bases without taking reading. He requested to redress complaint. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Faridabad for hearing of the case. The proceedings of the case held at Faridabad on The complainant and SDO were present. SDO submitted reply vide No dated stating therein that bill of consumer has been corrected after the verifying the reading from site. He further submitted that do to wrong allocation of group. The bill are no receive by the complaint. Now binder group has been change and consumer will receive bill regularly henceforth. The complainant was present who was satisfied with the reply and correction of bill. After going through the records and hearing the parties, the Forum decides to dispose of complaint with the direction that it must be ensured that bill are regularly to the consumer in future. Case is closed and parties to bear their own cost. As required under Haryana State Electricity Regulatory Commission (Guidelines for establishment of Forum for Redressal of Grievances of consumers, Electricity Ombudsman and Consumer Advocacy) Regulations-2016, the implementation of this decision may be intimated to this office within 30 days from the date of its receipt. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 13 th April (K.D. Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

7 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2123/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: Date of Order: Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: 1 K.D.Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman 2 Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of complaint of Sh M.D Haseeb, HN C-40, Gali No.1, Shiv Vihar Part-II Basantpur, Ismailpur, Faridabad regarding wrong billing.. Complainant/Petitioner V/s 1 XEN (OP) Divn. DHBVN, Gr. Faridabad 2 SDO (OP) Tilpath, DHBVN, Faridabad Appearance:- For Complainant: Present.Respondents For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer CGRF Hisar. 2 Respondent SDO

8 ORDER Sh M.D Haseeb, HN C-40, Gali No.1, Shiv Vihar Part-II, Basantpur, Ismailpur, Faridabad has got an electricity connection bearing account No under (OP) Sub-Division, DHBVN Faridabad hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. The complainant has filed the present complaint stating therein that his meter was replaced on and his is getting incorrect bill thereafter. He requested the forum to get bill correct as per meter reading. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Faridabad for hearing of the case. The proceedings of the case held at Faridabad on The complainant and SDO were present. SDO submitted reply vide No dated stating therein that wrong bill was issue to the consumer by wrong entry of MCO in the system. Now the bill has been corrected and consumer has to pay Rs.2173 instead of Rs complainant agreed to make the payment of corrected bill. After going through the records and hearing the parties, the Forum decides to dispose of complaint as complaint of consumer has already been redressed. Case is closed and parties to bear their own cost. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 13 th April (K.D. Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

9 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2092/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing and Date of Order Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: 1 K.D.Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman 2 Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of Sh. Chander Parkash, Bharat Agro Ind. Opposite Bus Stand GT Road Hansi, Hisar regarding wrong billing V/s.. Complainant/Petitioner Appearance:- For Complainant: For the Respondent XEN (OP) Divn DHBVN, Hansi SDO (OP) City DHBVN, Hansi Present 1 Nodal Officer CGRF Hisar 2 Representative of Respondent SDO.Respondents

10 Order Sh. Chander Parkash, Bharat Agro Ind. Opposite Bus Stand GT Road Hansi, Hisar has got an electricity connection bearing account No under SDO (OP) City Hansi, hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. The complainant has filed present complaint stating therein that meter of his premises has been replaced by the respondent Nigam and charges of meter replacement has been levied in his bill. Meter was working OK at the time of replacement so meter cost is not chargeable to him. He further submitted that after replacement of meter wrong bill has been issued to him. The complainant requested for redressal his grievances. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Hisar for hearing of the case. The proceedings held at Hisar on The complainant and respondent SDO were present. SDO submitted written reply vide No. 507 dated stating therein that consumer has given a complaint in his office regarding sparking in the meter on The site was visited by JE incharge and found that block of meter burnt due to sparking. The reading found at the time of checking as 3033 KVAH and block burnt. Meter was replaced and bill has been raised as per the reading recorded by meter. He also placed on record the copy of complaint, MCO, meter challan and bill of consumer. Complainant disputed the claim of the respondent Nigam and argued his case in accordance with written statement. After hearing the parties, the Forum directed the respondent SDO to get the old meter checked from the Lab and store challan on which new meter was drawn alongwith complete checking of premises may be placed before Forum on next date of hearing. Now to come on next date. Proceedings were held on Consumer and Representative of SDO were present. SDO submitted Copy of Lab report dated copy of CA/21 and checking report dated On going through records and documents submitted by Respondent Nigam, It is observed that meter bearing Sr. No /AVON make was found working with in permissible limit. Also form the lab report it was found that meter was replaced on KVAH and 724 KWH. On going through the record and hearing of parties forum decides to dispose of the complaint with the direction that meter cost charged to the consumer may be refunded as same is not chargeable dou to replacement of old meter on working ok. Case is closed. Both the parties to bear their own cost. As required under Haryana State Electricity Regulatory Commission (Guidelines for establishment of Forum for Redressal of Grievances of consumers, Electricity Ombudsman and Consumer Advocacy) Regulations-2016, the implementation of this decision may be intimated to this office within 30 days from the date of its receipt. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 14 th May (K.D.Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

11 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2126/2018 Date of Institution: 06/04/2018 Date of Hearing Dated of Order Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: 1 K.D.Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman 2 Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of Smt. Gyano Devi, House No. 24, New Grain Market,(Anaj Mandi) Hisar regarding wrong billing and release of connection. V/s.. Complainant/Petitioner Appearance:- For Complainant: None For the Respondent XEN (OP) Divn.No. 1,.DHBVN, Hisar SDO (OP) City DHBVN, Hisar 1 Nodal Officer CGRF Hisar 2 Representative Respondent SDO.Respondents

12 ORDER Smt. Gyano Devi, House No. 24, New Grain Market,(Anaj Mandi) Hisar has got an electricity connection bearing account No under SDO (OP) city Sub Division, DHBVN, Hisar, hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. The complainant has filed present complaint stating therein that her connection has been disconnected due to defaulting amount as she did not get any bill for a long time she request to the forum to get her connection restored after getting half bill. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Hisar for hearing of the case. The proceedings held at Hisar on The complainant was not present where as representative of respondent SDO was present. SDO submitted reply vide memo no dated stating that the complainant has not pay energy bill since april 2016 and supply to complainant premises stands disconnected. He further submitted that supply can be restored only if payments are made by the complainant. After going through the record available on file and hearing the parties the Forum decides to dispose of the complaint as there is no merit in the complaint of complainant. Case is closed. Party to bear their own cost. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 14 th May, (K.D.Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

13 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2159/2018 Date of Institution: 10/05/2018 Date of Hearing Dated of Order Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: 1 K.D.Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman 2 Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of Smt. Sudesh Devi W/o Sh. Rakesh House No UE, Jind regarding release of T/well Connection. V/s.. Complainant/Petitioner Appearance:- For Complainant: Present For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer CGRF Hisar 2 Respondent JE Incharge XEN (OP) Divn.DHBVN, Hansi JE Sub Office, Sisai.Respondents

14 ORDER Smt. Sudesh Devi W/ Sh. Rajesh Kumar, House No UE, Jind has applied for a electric connection under JE Sub Office, Sisai, hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. The complainant has filed present complaint stating therein that she had applied for release of T/well connection under Tatkal scheme and an amount of of Rs. 1 lac has been already deposited by her. She requested the forum to get her the connection released. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Hisar for hearing of the case. The proceedings held at Hisar on The complainant and respondent JE sub office were present. JE submitted reply vide memo no dated alongwith copy of A&A form affidavit, BA-16, Demand notice, Notice of cancellation etc. He further submitted that complainant failed to the comply with various notices and as such application of the complainant has been cancelled on dated He further submitted that connection under Tatkal scheme are not released w.e.f Complainant was present who argued in accordance with written submission and further stated that no notice has been sent to her. After going through the record available on file and hearing the parties the Forum decides to dispose of the complaint with the direction that application of complainant may be restored and connection may be released considering the complainant as old applicant. Case is closed. Party to bear their own cost. As required under Haryana State Electricity Regulatory Commission (Guidelines for establishment of Forum for Redressal of Grievances of consumers, Electricity Ombudsman and Consumer Advocacy) Regulations-2016, the implementation of this decision may be intimated to this office within 30 days from the date of its receipt. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 14 th May, (K.D.Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

15 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2160/2018 Date of Institution: 11/05/2018 Date of Hearing Dated of Order Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: 1 K.D.Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman 2 Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of Sh. Rakesh kumar S/o Hawa Singh, VPO Dhani Gopla Distt. Fatehabd regarding Disconnection of his request. V/s.. Complainant/Petitioner Appearance:- For Complainant: Present For the Respondent XEN (OP) Divn.DHBVN, Tohana SDO Sub Division, Uklana 1 Nodal Officer CGRF Hisar 2 Representative of Respondent SDO.Respondents

16 ORDER Sh. Rakesh Kumar S/o Sh. Hawa Singh V&PO Dhani Gopal Distt. Fatehabad has got an electric connection bearing Account No. CD1D under SDO Op, DHBVN Uklana, hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. The complainant has filed present complaint stating therein that he applied for PDCO after paying the final bill. PDCO was issued on but same has not been effected so far. He requested the forum to redress his complaint The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Hisar for hearing of the case. The proceedings held at Hisar on The complainant and representative of respondent SDO were present. No reply was submitted by the SDO. However representative stated that the grievance has already been redressed. Complainant was present who agreed to submission made by the respondent and was satisfied with the reply. After going through the record available on file and hearing the parties the Forum decides to dispose of the complaint with no direction as complaint has been already redressed. Case is closed. Parties to bear their own cost. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 14 th May, the (K.D.Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

17 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar Telephone No (website: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2124/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: Date of Order: Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: 1 K.D.Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman 2 Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of complaint of M/s Indus Tower Ltd., SCO-137, 1 st Floor, Sector 13, U.E. Karnal regarding wrong billing V/s.. Complainant/Petitioner XEN (OP) DHBVN, Jind SDO (OP) DHBVN, Naguran.Respondents Appearance:- For Complainant: Present For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer CGRF Hisar 2 Representative of Respondent SDO

18 ORDER M/s Indus Tower Ltd. SCO-137, Sector 13, Urban Estate- Karnal has got an electricity connection bearing account No. TN under SDO (OP) S/Division, Naguran, Jind has made a complaint and hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint The complainant has filed the present complaint stating therein that they have mobile tower connection at village Thua under op sub division Naguran. Meter bearing Sr. no Genus make was provided on the connection vide MCO no. 18/1016 effected on whereas on vide MCO no. 27/1270 meter bearing sr. no , Genus make was removed. Thus the meter removed on is the not the same as was the provided on On filling RTI application MCO no. 58/814 effected on was provided to him. He further submitted that half margin no. 031/2015/62 was raised by the audit party considering the meter reading in 11/2014 as and 2087 in 1/2015. The half margin charged by audit without considering MCO no. 58/814 is wrong and needs to be withdrawn. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Hisar for hearing of the case. The proceedings held at Hisar on The complainant and representative of respondent SDO were present. The respondent SDO filed written reply vide memo no. 389 dated stating therein that the meter of complainant was replaced on and again on The short assessment was pointed out by the audit party amounting to Rs / for the left over consumption. He further submitted that bill of consumer is correct and charged as per record. He also submitted copy of consumption, half margin dated 8/8/2016, MCO dated 19/4/2010, 5/12/2014 and 8/4/2016. Complainant was present who contested the statement of the respondent SDO and stated that when MCO has been affected during 12/2014 at IR 1 then how the charring can be correct. The meter installed on 12/05/2014 was Genus make. Sr. no and same was removed during April Neither the representative of SDO nor nodal officer could explain about the MCO No. 58/814 affected on 5/12/2014. After going through the record on file and hearing the parties, the Forum finds that MCO has been effected on 5/12/2014 with final reading as RNV. Meter Genus make and Sr.no was remove which was installed vide MCO no. 18/1016 during 4/2010. This clearly indicates that half margin No. 62/81 dated 8/8/16 is incorrect and needs to be withdrawn. Forum therefore decided to dispose of complaint with the direction to withdraw the half margin wrong with surcharge and bill be corrected accordingly. The case is closed. Both the parties to bear their own cost. As required under Haryana State Electricity Regulatory Commission (Guidelines for establishment of Forum for Redressal of Grievances of consumers, Electricity Ombudsman and

19 Consumer Advocacy) Regulations-2016, the implementation of this decision may be intimated to this office within 30 days from the date of its receipt. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 15 th, May (K.D.Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

20 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar Telephone No (website: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2140/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: Date of Order: Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: 1 K.D.Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman 2 Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of complaint of M/s Indus Tower Ltd., SCO-137, 1 st Floor, Sector 13, U.E. Karnal, regarding wrong billing V/s.. Complainant/Petitioner XEN (OP) DHBVN, Jind SDO (OP) S/Division, DHBVN, Naguran, Jind.Respondents Appearance:- For Complainant: Present For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer CGRF Hisar 2 Representative of Respondent SDO

21 ORDER M/s Indus Tower Ltd., SCO-137, 1 st Floor, Sector 13, U.E. Karnal has got an electricity connection bearing account No. J14TN under (OP) S/Division, Naguran, Jind has made a complaint and hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint The complainant has filed the present complaint stating therein that bill of Rs has been issued to him. He got the meter checked which is found OK but still a bill of Rs has been raised to him. He is making payment of bills regularly and there is no fault on his part. He requested to get his complaint redressed. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Hisar for hearing of the case. The proceedings held at Hisar on The complainant and respondent SDO were present. The respondent SDO filed written reply vide no dated stating therein that the bill of consumer has been corrected as per consumption basis. He further submitted that meter was replaced in the month of 3/2015 and bill has been corrected for to on the basis of consumption recorded and payments made by complainant during the period has also been adjusted. Reading of the meter was found to be 5342 as on He also placed on record the copy of calculation sheet. Consumer was present who submitted that he is making the payment regularly and now is not in a position to make the payment in one lot. He requested the forum to allow him payment in installments without surcharge. After going through the record on file and hearing the party, the Forum finds that it is a case of accumulation of reading and bill has been corrected by respondent SDO as per the instructions/tariff applicable and reading recorded by meter as is evident from photo of meter reading placed on record. However, Forum decides to accept the pending amount in three installments alongwith current bill without levying surcharge on the balance amount. The case is closed. Both the parties to bear their own cost. As required under Haryana State Electricity Regulatory Commission (Guidelines for establishment of Forum for Redressal of Grievances of consumers, Electricity Ombudsman and Consumer Advocacy) Regulations-2016, the implementation of this decision may be intimated to this office within 30 days from the date of its receipt. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 14 th,may, (K.D.Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

22 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar Telephone No (website: Case No. DH/CGRF:- 2132/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: Date of Order: Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: 1 K.D.Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman 2 Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of complaint of M/s Indus Tower Ltd., SCO-137, 1 st Floor, Sector 13, U.E. Karnal regarding wrong billing V/s.. Complainant/Petitioner XEN (OP) DHBVN, Safidon SDO S/Division, DHBVN, Safidon.Respondents Appearance:- For Complainant: Present For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer CGRF Hisar 2 Representative of Respondent SDO

23 ORDER M/s Indus Tower Ltd. SCO-137, Sector 13, Urban Estate- Karnal has got an electricity connection bearing account No. SM under SDO (OP) S/Division, Safidon, Jind has made a complaint and hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint The complainant has filed the present complaint stating therein that they have mobile tower connection at village Haat under op sub division Safidon. An amount of Rs / was charged as short assessment vide half margin No. 41/81/2015 on dated without verifying facts on record. He further submitted that meter was replaced on vide MCO no. 58/1071 whereas audit pointed out the short assessment by the considering the meter replaced on and credit of unit charged during 5/2016 to 9/12/2016 has not been given to them. He requested to withdraw the assessment amount charged by respondent SDO. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Hisar for hearing of the case. The proceedings held at Hisar on The complainant and representative of respondent SDO were present. The respondent SDO filed written reply vide memo no. 262 dated stating therein that the meter was changed on vide MCO no. 85/898. After the meter was changed M&P team visited the site and matter was regularized on vide MT1 no. 83/391. First reading was taken in the month of 8/2016 and bill was issued during 9/2016. Credit for amount charged on average basis during the month of form 5/16 to 8/16 was given in the month of 9/2016. So amount was rightly pointed out by the audit party. Complainant was present who stated that amount refunded during 9/2016 has been charged again in 10/2016. The representative of SDO pointed out that Amount of Rs / charged during the month of 10/2016 has already been redounded during the month of 5/2018 and requested the forum to file the complaint. After going through the record on file and hearing the parties, the Forum finds that the complaint of complainant has been redressed. So it was decided to dispose of the complaint with the direction to respondent SDO to ensure that refund of amount charged as assured by his representative. The case is closed. Both the parties to bear their own cost. As required under Haryana State Electricity Regulatory Commission (Guidelines for establishment of Forum for Redressal of Grievances of consumers, Electricity Ombudsman and Consumer Advocacy) Regulations-2016, the implementation of this decision may be intimated to this office within 30 days from the date of its receipt. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 15 th, May (K.D.Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

24 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar Telephone No (website: Case No. DH/CGRF:- 2140/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: Date of Order: Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: 1 K.D.Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman 2 Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of complaint of M/s Indus Tower Ltd., SCO-137, 1 st Floor, Sector 13, U.E. Karnal regarding wrong billing V/s.. Complainant/Petitioner XEN (OP) DHBVN, Jind SDO S/Division, DHBVN, Naguran.Respondents Appearance:- For Complainant: Present For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer CGRF Hisar 2 Representative of Respondent SDO

25 ORDER M/s Indus Tower Ltd. SCO-137, Sector 13, Urban Estate- Karnal has got an electricity connection bearing account No. TN under SDO (OP) S/Division, Naguran, Jind has made a complaint and hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint The complainant has filed the present complaint stating therein that they have mobile tower connection at village Dalamwala under op sub division Naguran. An amount of Rs / was charged as short assessment vide half margin No. 23/97 on dated without verifying facts on record. He further submitted that meter was replaced on vide MCO no. 24/985 as existing CTs got damaged and replaced. After replacement of CTs the meter bearing sr. no. HRT/17899, secure make found defective (RNV). This meter was replaced on 8/1/16 vide MCO no. 5/1044 with HPL make meter bearing Sr.no The reading of meter replaced on 8/1/2016 was reported to 5080 in 4/201. The MCO was not entered in the revenue record. Also consumption from 7/15 to 8/1/16 was not recorded and billed on provisional bases. The actual reading was recorded by meter form 4/2013 to 7/2015 whereas audit pointed out the short assessment from 4/13 to 3/16. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Hisar for hearing of the case. The proceedings held at Hisar on The complainant and representative of respondent SDO were present. The respondent SDO filed written reply vide memo no. 390 dated stating therein that 4500 unit bimonthly have been charged to complainant for the period 4/13 to 6/15 whereas after the replacement of meter average consumption comes out to be 5372 unit bimonthly. So no amount is refundable. Complainant contested the reply of SDO and stated that the Sr. no. of meter indicated on both the MCOs clearly indicates and substantiates his statement. The representative of SDO stated that the different sr. no. was mistake of JE. and amount charged through half margin is correct. Complainant submitted consumption data from 13/4/2013 to date alongwith MT1 dated and After going through the record on file and hearing the parties, the Forum finds that:- 1. premises of complainant was checked on by M&P wing on request of SDO vide memo no. 729 dated for regularization of matter as meter and CT was already changed by the SDO. 2. Meter Sr. no / HTL make was found installed by M&P whereas as JE has recorded Sr. no as on the MCO during 7/2015. This may be due to mistake as pointed out by respondent SDO. 3. Meter accuracy was also checked by M&P team on and found within permissible limit with reading as x 6 KWH. 4. The premises was again checked by the M&P team on 8/1/2016 on request of SDO vide memo no dated for the replacement of burnt meter. 5. Meter bearing Sr.no , found installed on , was removed on reading as RNV and new meter bearing Sr. No was installed.

26 6. JE incharge again entered wrong particular of the old meter on MCO dated 4/7/ From the consumption data submitted by the complainant it is gathered that reading was recorded regularly up to 7/2015 and reading was recorded during 7/2015. It is also observed that reading was not recorded form 9/2015 to 3/2016. After going through the record on file and hearing the parties, the Forum finds that reading has been recorded regularly up to 7/2015 and after 5/2016 to date. So charging on average base for the period 4/22013 to 7/2015 is not justified. The forum therefore decides to dispose of the complaint with the direction that amount charged on average bases form 4/2013 to 7/2015 may be withdrawn. Forum also decided that disciplinary action may be taken against the JE incharge for dealing the issue in causal way. The case is closed. Both the parties to bear their own cost. As required under Haryana State Electricity Regulatory Commission (Guidelines for establishment of Forum for Redressal of Grievances of consumers, Electricity Ombudsman and Consumer Advocacy) Regulations-2016, the implementation of this decision may be intimated to this office within 30 days from the date of its receipt. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 15 th, May (K.D.Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

27 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2111/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: Date of Order: Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: 1 K.D.Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman 2 Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of complaint of Ch. Bansi Lal University, Bhiwani regarding wrong billing. V/s.. Complainant/Petitioner 1 Xen (OP) Division, DHBVN, Bhiwani 2 SDO (OP) S/U S/D-1DHBVN, Bhiwani Appearance:-.Respondents For Complainant: None For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer/CGRF, DHBVN, Hisar 2 Respondent SDO

28 ORDER Ch. Bansi Lal University, Bhiwani got an electricity connection bearing account No under SDO (OP) S/U-1 DHBVN Bhiwani, hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. The complainant has filed the present complaint stating therein that the burden of heavy amount of Rs has been levied on them which is not justified and wrong. The complainant requested to redress their complaint. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Bhiwani for hearing of the case. Proceedings of the case were held at Bhiwani on The consumer was not present but respondent SDO was present. The respondent SDO filed written reply vide No. 798 dated stating therein that the complainant has made complaint regarding waival of surcharge imposed on consumer account on account of dishonoured cheque. Complainant made the payment for the month of Dec.2017 for Rs through account payee cheque which was dishonored. Due to dishonour of cheque an amount of Rs as surcharge and Rs as penalty was imposed on the consumer. He further submitted that connection of consumer was released against deposit estimate amounting to Rs but complainant deposited an amount of Rs.4.0 lacs and hence balance amount of Rs was charged to the consumer. Consumer was informed through a notice on regarding payment of balance amount. He was informed and asked to deposit the amount many times thereafter. SDO submitted on record estimate No.DWD-65/ and notice dated and half margin pointed out regarding charging of amount. Neither complainant or his representative was present for pursuing the case. After going through the record on case file and hearing the parties, the Forum decides to dispose of the complaint as there is no merit in the complaint. Case is closed. Both the parties to bear their own costs. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 20 th April, (K.D.Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

29 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2112/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: Date of Order: Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: 1 K.D.Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman 2 Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of complaint of M/S Shiv Bhole Stone Crusher, Kheri Battar, Tehsil Ch. Dadri (Bhiwani ) regarding refund of service connection charges.. Complainant/Petitioner V/s 1 Xen (OP) Division, DHBVN, Ch Dadri 2 SDO (OP) DHBVN, Atela Kalan Appearance:-.Respondents For Complainant: Present For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer/CGRF, DHBVN, Hisar 2 Respondent SDO

30 ORDER M/S Shiv Bhole Stone Crusher, Kheri Battar, Tehsil Ch. Dadri (Bhiwani ) got an electricity connection bearing account No. MR HT-17 under SDO (OP) DHBVN Atela Kalan, hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. The complainant has filed the present complaint stating therein that a sum of Rs was deposited by him as service connection charges but connection was got released under self execution scheme. Supervision 1.5% were also deposited with the Nigam. The complainant requested to redress their complaint. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Bhiwani for hearing of the case. Proceedings of the case were held at Bhiwani on The representative of complainant & representative of respondent SDO were present. The respondent SDO filed written reply vide No. 52 dated stating therein that complainant applied for release of connection on with contract demand of 389 KVA. Complainant deposited an amount of Rs including service connection charges amounting to Rs Site of applicant was checked by the area incharge and an estimate amounting to Rs was sanctioned by competent authority. Demand notice was issued to consumer for deposit of estimated cost but the consumer preferred to release of connection by executing the work himself. Supervision charges was also deposited by the complainant. Service connection charges was charged as per SC No.D-26/2011 whereas consumer is demanding refund of service connection charges under SC No.D-42/2006 which is not correct. He further submitted that sales instructions 42/2006 did not allow the refund of service connection charges and made provisions regarding non charging of development charge from the applicant. He submitted that service connection was charged by applicant as per SC No.D- 26/2011 and cannot be refunded. Complainant stated that earlier also CGRF has allowed refund of service connection charges to 4-5 consumers in his area. He also submitted the copy of letter from SE/Commercial DHBVN Hisar dated and XEN cum Nodal Officer DHBVN Hisar letter dated in support of his claim. He further submitted that charging of service connection charges to him will be injustice and may be allowed refund of same. After going through the record on case file and hearing the parties, the Forum decides to dispose of the complaint and finds no merit in the complaint. The service connection charges are rightly chargeable from the consumer in view of Sales instructions 26/2011 and did not consider the earlier decision of CGRF as these are not applicable in the instant case. Case is closed. Both the parties to bear their own costs. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 20 th April, (K.D.Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

31 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2131/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: Date of Order: Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: 1 K.D.Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman 2 Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of complaint of Smt Raj Bala w/o Late Sh. Fateh Singh, Village Nakipur, Tehsil Loharu (Bhiwani ) regarding shifting of line... Complainant/Petitioner V/s 1 Xen (OP) S/U Division, DHBVN, Bhiwani 2 SDO (OP) DHBVN, Digawan Jattan Appearance:-.Respondents For Complainant: Present For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer/CGRF, DHBVN, Hisar 2 Respondent SDO

32 ORDER Smt Raj Bala w/o Late Sh. Fateh Singh, Village Nakpur, Tehsil Loharu (Bhiwani ) has applied for shifting of line under SDO (OP) DHBVN, Digawan Jattan, hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. The complainant has filed the present complaint stating therein that 11 KV line is passing over her house. Due to this line there is danger to the life of complainant. She further stated that SDO is demanding Rs as estimate for shifting of line. The complainant requested to redress her complaint. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Bhiwani for hearing of the case. Proceedings of the case were held at Bhiwani on The representative of complainant & respondent SDO were present. The respondent SDO filed written reply vide No dated stating therein that complainant made a request to his office regarding shifting of 11 KV line passing through her house. Site was checked by Sh. Pawan Kumar JE and found that house has been erected by the complainant under the 11 KV line. He prepared a deposit estimate amounting to Rs but complainant has not deposited so the line cannot be shifted without the deposit of estimated cost. He further submitted that complainant made a complaint to Hon ble CM Haryana on CM Window portal. Complaint was investigated and same has been filed on by competent authority i.e. CM office. Complainant was present who argued the case in line with written submission and stated that line was erected in her field against her will and being a poor person she is not in a position to deposit the estimated cost. After going through the record on case file and hearing the parties, the Forum decides to dispose of the complaint as there is no merit in the complaint. Line cannot be shifted without deposit of amount as house was erected by her under 11 KV line in violation of Elecy Act. Also the complaint has already been investigated by competent authority and same stands filed. Case is closed. Both the parties to bear their own costs. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 20 th April, (K.D.Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

33 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2121/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: Date of Order: Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: 1 K.D.Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman 2 Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of complaint of Sh Pardeep Pawaria, HN G-1-240, Indra Enclave, Sector 21-D, Faridabad regarding wrong charging V/s 1 XEN (OP) Divn. DHBVN, Old Faridabad 2 SDO (OP) Sub Divn-4, DHBVN, Faridabad.. Complainant/Petitioner Appearance:- For Complainant: Present.Respondents For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer CGRF Hisar. 2 Respondent SDO

34 ORDER Sh Pardeep Pawaria, H.N. G-1-240, Indra Enclave, Sector 21-D,Faridabad has got an electricity connection bearing account No under (OP) Sub-Division, DHBVN-4 Faridabad hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. The complainant has filed the present complaint stating therein that he is not receiving electricity bill at his resident also meter reading are not taken by DHBVN he is being charge on average bases without taking reading. He requested to redress complaint. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Faridabad for hearing of the case. The proceedings of the case held at Faridabad on The complainant and SDO were present. SDO submitted reply vide No dated stating therein that bill of consumer has been corrected after the verifying the reading from site. He further submitted that do to wrong allocation of group. The bill are no receive by the complaint. Now binder group has been change and consumer will receive bill regularly henceforth. The complainant was present who was satisfied with the reply and correction of bill. After going through the records and hearing the parties, the Forum decides to dispose of complaint with the direction that it must be ensured that bill are regularly to the consumer in future. Case is closed and parties to bear their own cost. As required under Haryana State Electricity Regulatory Commission (Guidelines for establishment of Forum for Redressal of Grievances of consumers, Electricity Ombudsman and Consumer Advocacy) Regulations-2016, the implementation of this decision may be intimated to this office within 30 days from the date of its receipt. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 13 th April (K.D. Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

35 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2123/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: Date of Order: Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: 1 K.D.Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman 2 Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of complaint of Sh M.D Haseeb, HN C-40, Gali No.1, Shiv Vihar Part-II Basantpur, Ismailpur, Faridabad regarding wrong billing V/s 1 XEN (OP) Divn. DHBVN, Gr. Faridabad 2 SDO (OP) Tilpath, DHBVN, Faridabad.. Complainant/Petitioner Appearance:- For Complainant: Present.Respondents For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer CGRF Hisar. 2 Respondent SDO

36 ORDER Sh M.D Haseeb, HN C-40, Gali No.1, Shiv Vihar Part-II, Basantpur, Ismailpur, Faridabad has got an electricity connection bearing account No under (OP) Sub-Division, DHBVN Faridabad hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. The complainant has filed the present complaint stating therein that his meter was replaced on and his is getting incorrect bill thereafter. He requested the forum to get bill correct as per meter reading. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Faridabad for hearing of the case. The proceedings of the case held at Faridabad on The complainant and SDO were present. SDO submitted reply vide No dated stating therein that wrong bill was issue to the consumer by wrong entry of MCO in the system. Now the bill has been corrected and consumer has to pay Rs.2173 instead of Rs complainant agreed to make the payment of corrected bill. After going through the records and hearing the parties, the Forum decides to dispose of complaint as complaint of consumer has already been redressed. Case is closed and parties to bear their own cost. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 13 th April (K.D. Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

37 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2116/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: Date of Order: Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: 1. K D Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman 2 Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of complaint of Sh. Ravinder Nath Sharma, , Ravindra Niwash, Sector-17, Gurgaon regarding wrong billing. V/s.. Complainant/Petitioner 1 Xen (OP) S/U Division, DHBVN, Gurgaon 2 SDO (OP) Maruti S/Divn. DHBVN, Gurgaon.Respondents Appearance:- For Complainant: Present For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer/CGRF, DHBVN, Hisar 2 Representative of respondent SDO

38 ORDER Sh. Ravinder Nath Sharma, , Ravindra Niwash, Sector-17, Gurgaon got an electricity connection bearing account No under SDO (OP) Maruti S/D DHBVN, Gurgaon, hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. The complainant has filed the present complaint stating therein that he has a domestic connection in Palam Vihar but he is not getting electricity bills since long. As a result he has to visit S/Divn. every time and make request to generate the bill. He has requested the forum to redress his complaint. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Gurugram for hearing of the case. Proceedings were held on The complainant and representatives of respondent SDO were present. However, SDO submitted reply vide memo No dated stating that at the time of shifting of system under RAPDRP wrong binder has been allocated to the complainant. As a result bill could not prepared and delivered to complainant. Now the binder has been updated and bill will be issued &delivered to consumer during next billing cycle. He also placed on record copy of snaps of showing the binder updation. Consumer was satisfied with the reply of the respondent SDO. After going through the record available in the file and hearing the parties, the Forum decides to dispose off the complaint with the direction that respondent SDO shall ensure that bill is prepared and delivered to consumer in next billing cycle and continuously thereafter. Case is closed. No cost on either side. As required under Haryana State Electricity Regulatory Commission (Guidelines for establishment of Forum for Redressal of Grievances of consumers, Electricity Ombudsman and Consumer Advocacy) Regulations-2016, the implementation of this decision may be intimated to this office within 30 days from the date of its receipt. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 25 th April, (K.D. Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

39 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2117/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: Date of Order: Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: 1. K D Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman 2 Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of complaint of Smt. Madhvi Malik, M-42, old DLF, Sector-14, Gurgaon regarding non receipt of bills. V/s.. Complainant/Petitioner 1 Xen (OP) S/U Division, DHBVN, Gurgaon 2 SDO (OP) Maruti S/Divn. DHBVN, Gurgaon.Respondents Appearance:- For Complainant: Representative For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer/CGRF, DHBVN, Hisar 2 Representative of respondent SDO

40 ORDER Smt. Madhvi Malik, M-42, old DLF, Sector-14, Gurgaon got an electricity connection bearing account No under SDO (OP) Maruti S/D DHBVN, Gurgaon, hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. The complainant has filed the present complaint stating therein that she is not receiving electricity bill since last one year and on follow up a bill amounting to Rs has been delivered. She has requested the forum to redress her complaint. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Gurugram for hearing of the case. Proceedings were held on The representatives of complainant and respondent SDO were present. However, SDO submitted reply vide memo No dated stating that bill could not be generated due to some system error and ticket was raised for the removal of error time and again but same could not be rectified. Now the error has been rectified and bill has been raised to consumer as per reading recorded by the meter and at present a bill of Rs is outstanding against the consumer which is due for payment on The copy of duplicate bill and reply of SDO was handed over to consumer who argued the case in line with written submission and stated that her premises is given on rent and due to non delivery of bills by respondent SDO in time she is unable to recover the same from the tenant. She stressed upon that Licensee may be directed to issue the bills on time so that bills are paid regularly. After going through the record available in the file and hearing the parties, the Forum finds that non delivery of bills by Licensee to consumer is deficiency in service and wants penal action so Forum decides to dispose off the complaint with the direction that penalty of Rs may be levied on the Licensee in view of standard of performance issued by Licensee and same may be credited to account of complainant. Licensee will recover the penalty amount from the official responsible for delay in delivery of bills. Case is closed. No cost on either side. As required under Haryana State Electricity Regulatory Commission (Guidelines for establishment of Forum for Redressal of Grievances of consumers, Electricity Ombudsman and Consumer Advocacy) Regulations-2016, the implementation of this decision may be intimated to this office within 30 days from the date of its receipt. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 25 th April, (K.D. Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

41 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2118/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: Date of Order: Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: 1. K D Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman 2 Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of complaint of Smt. Sunita w/o Sh. Subhash, HN 1322, Gali No.37, Surat Nagar, Phase-II, Gurgaon regarding wrong billing. V/s.. Complainant/Petitioner 1 Xen (OP) City Division, DHBVN, Gurgaon 2 SDO (OP) New Palam Vihar S/Divn. DHBVN, Gurgaon.Respondents Appearance:- For Complainant: Representative For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer/CGRF, DHBVN, Hisar 2 Representative of respondent SDO

42 ORDER Smt. Sunita w/o Sh. Subhash, HN 1322, Gali No.37, Surat Nagar, Phase-II, Gurgaon got an electricity connection bearing account No under SDO (OP) New Palam Vihar S/D DHBVN, Gurgaon, hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint The complainant has filed the present complaint stating therein that wrong bill has been issued to her without taking reading by respondent SDO. The new reading recorded by the meter has been shown as zero whereas bill of Rs has been issued to her. She has requested the forum to redress her complaint. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Gurugram for hearing of the case. Proceedings were held on The representatives of complainant and respondent SDO were present. However, SDO submitted reply vide memo No dated stating that due to non taking of reading by Billing agency energy bill for the month of 02/2018 was generated on average basis and now reading has been verified and correct bill has been issued to consumer during 04/2018. Average charged to consumer has been adjusted in her account. Representative of consumer was present who was satisfied with correction of bill and stated that he does not want to pursue the complaint further. After going through the record available in the file and hearing the parties, the Forum decides to dispose off the complaint with no direction as complaint of the complainant has already been redressed. Case is closed. No cost on either side. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 25 th April, (K.D. Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

43 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2119/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: Date of Order: Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: 1. K D Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman 2 Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of complaint of Smt. Usha Ahuja, HN 713F, Sector-04, Gurgaon regarding interruption in supply & replacement of meter. V/s.. Complainant/Petitioner 1 Xen (OP) City Division, DHBVN, Gurgaon 2 SDO (OP) New Colony S/Divn. DHBVN, Gurgaon.Respondents Appearance:- For Complainant: Representative For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer/CGRF, DHBVN, Hisar 2 Representative of respondent SDO

44 ORDER Smt. Usha Ahuja, HN 713F, Sector-04, Gurgaon got an electricity connection bearing account No under SDO (OP) New Colony S/D DHBVN, Gurgaon, hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. The complainant has filed the present complaint stating therein that she made a request to SDO on regarding fluctuation of electricity at her residence but no action was taken by respondent SDO resulting in damage to electricity appliances. She has requested the forum to redress her complaint. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Gurugram for hearing of the case. Proceedings were held on The representatives of complainant and respondent SDO were present. However, SDO submitted reply vide memo No dated stating that Meter has been changed on vide MCO No dated He further submitted that account of consumer could not be overhauled due to software error. Complaint Ticket has been generated for resolving the error. The representative of SDO stated that when it is tried to correct the bill system shows error as old data segment error. The representative of complainant stated that he made a complaint on and same was marked to Consumer Clerk to issue MCO on same day but no action was taken by respondent SDO. The representative of SDO could not explain the reason for delay in replacement of meter or issue of MCO and the cause of error shown by system. This is a casual way in attending consumer complaints and Forum took serious note of the same. After going through the record available in the file and hearing the parties, the Forum finds that it is a deficiency in service and therefore decides levy of penalty of Rs in view of standard of performance issued by HERC. The penalty amount may be recovered from responsible official and credited to consumer account. Case is closed. No cost on either side. As required under Haryana State Electricity Regulatory Commission (Guidelines for establishment of Forum for Redressal of Grievances of consumers, Electricity Ombudsman and Consumer Advocacy) Regulations-2016, the implementation of this decision may be intimated to this office within 30 days from the date of its receipt. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 25 th April, (K.D. Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

45 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2122/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: Date of Order: Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: 1. K D Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman 2 Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of complaint of Sh. Rohit Mathur, Flat-48, Jawahar Apartment, Plot No.54, Sector-56, Gurgaon regarding wrong billing. V/s.. Complainant/Petitioner 1 Xen (OP) S/U Division, DHBVN, Gurgaon 2 SDO (OP) South City S/Divn. DHBVN, Gurgaon.Respondents Appearance:- For Complainant: Present For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer/CGRF, DHBVN, Hisar 2 Representative respondent SDO

46 ORDER Sh. Rohit Mathur, Flat-48, Jawahar Apartment, Plot No.54, Sector-56,Gurgaon got an electricity connection bearing account No under SDO (OP) South City S/D DHBVN, Gurgaon, hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. The complainant has filed the present complaint stating therein that wrong bill has been issued to him amounting to Rs On being contacted to SDO bill was not corrected and he is facing undue harassment since 9/2017. He has requested the forum to redress his complaint. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Gurugram for hearing of the case. Proceedings were held on The complainant and representatives of respondent SDO were present. However, SDO submitted reply vide memo No dated stating that bill of consumer has been corrected and bill of Rs is outstanding against him. He also placed on record copy of duplicate bill issued to consumer. Consumer was present who argued in line with written submissions ad stated that he is visiting SDO office for 2-3 times in a week since Sept.2017 after taking leave from his office. He requested the Forum to direct respondent Nigam to be careful in issuing the bill and correction thereof. After going through the record available in the file and hearing the parties, the Forum decides to dispose off the complaint with no direction as complaint of the complainant has already been redressed. However, respondent is directed to be careful in future in redressing the complaints received by his office. Case is closed. No cost on either side. As required under Haryana State Electricity Regulatory Commission (Guidelines for establishment of Forum for Redressal of Grievances of consumers, Electricity Ombudsman and Consumer Advocacy) Regulations-2016, the implementation of this decision may be intimated to this office within 30 days from the date of its receipt. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 25 th April, (K.D. Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

47 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2128/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: Date of Order: Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: 1. K D Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman 2 Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of complaint of M/S Indus Tower Ltd. Building No.10, Tower-B, 9 th Floor, DLF Cyber City, Gurgaon regarding wrong billing. V/s 1 Xen (OP) Division, DHBVN, Manesar 2 SDO (OP) S/Divn. DHBVN, Manesar.. Complainant/Petitioner.Respondents Appearance:- For Complainant: Representative of complainant For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer/CGRF, DHBVN, Hisar 2 Representative of respondent SDO

48 ORDER M/S Indus Tower Ltd. Building No.10, Tower-B, 9 th Floor, DLF Cyber City, Gurgaon got an electricity connection bearing account No. ACDS-0019H under SDO (OP) S/D DHBVN, Manesar, hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. The complainant has filed the present complaint stating therein that wrong amount has been charged in their account as they had written a letter to SDO for permanent disconnection on but supply was not disconnected and a bill of Rs has been raised to them in August He has requested the forum to redress his complaint. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Gurugram for hearing of the case. Proceedings were held on The complainant and representatives of respondent SDO were present. However, SDO submitted reply vide memo No. 150 dated stating that consumer extended load from 10 to 28 KW in 06/2016 and billed as per meter reading in 06/16 and 07/2016 and on average basis thereafter. No payment has been made by consumer after resulting in defaulting amount of Rs As a result PDCO was effected on Removed meter was sent to Lab and meter was found defective as per lab record. He also placed on record the copy of PDCO, M&P report dated and M&T lab report dated alongwith consumption pattern of complainant. Representative of complainant stated that they had made a request for disconnection in 9/2016 and supply was not disconnected by respondent SDO despite their request. However he could not place on record the copy of request made by them to respondent Nigam. Representative of SDO contested that complainant got the load extended in 6/2016 so possibility of making request in 9/2016 does not arise. He further stated that bill was raised to consumer regularly but no objection was made by them till complaint in CGRF. Representative of complainant could not explain the reasons and produced documents in his favour. After going through the record available in the file and hearing the parties, the Forum decides to dispose off the complaint with no direction as there is no merit in the complaint and bill has been correctly raised on average basis due to internal defect in the meter. Case is closed. No cost on either side. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 25 th April, (K.D. Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

49 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2091/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing Dated of Order Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: 1 K.D.Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman 2 Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of Sh. Satbir Singh s/o Sh. Tara Chand, VPO Umra, Tehsil Hansi, Hisar regarding wrong billing V/s.. Complainant/Petitioner Appearance:- For Complainant: For the Respondent XEN (OP) Divn. DHBVN, Hansi JE (OP) S/Office DHBVN, Umra Present 1 Nodal Officer CGRF Hisar 2 Representative of Respondent SDO.Respondents

50 ORDER Sh. Satbir Singh s/o Sh. Tara Chand, VPO Umra, Tehsil Hansi, Hisar has got an electricity connection bearing account No. UU1D-0681A under (OP) S/Office Umra, hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. The complainant has filed present complaint stating therein that he is making payment of electricity bills but a huge amount has been levied in his bill. redressal his grievances. The complainant requested for The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Hisar for hearing of the case. The proceedings held at Hisar on The complainant and respondent SDO were present. SDO submitted written reply vide No dated stating therein that wrong bill has been issued to consumer from 5/2013 to 12/2017 on an average of 80 units. During 12/2017 reading recorded by the meter was found to be whereas in 5/2017 reading was He further stated that audit party pointed out the difference of reading charged to consumer and actual reading recorded by meter. On the basis of difference of reading an amount of Rs was charged to consumer. He further stated that bill of complainant has been raised on actual reading recorded by the meter and requested to file the complaint. Complainant was present who agreed to reply even by the respondent SDO. After going through the record available on file and hearing the parties the Forum decides to dispose of the complaint as complaint has already been redressed and consumer is satisfied with the reply by respondent SDO. Case is closed. Party to bear their own cost.. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 6 th April, (K.D.Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

51 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2098/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing Dated of Order Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: 1 K.D.Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman 2 Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member billing In the matter of Smt. Sunita w/o Sh. Anil Kumar, HN 266/Sector-14, Hisar regarding wrong V/s.. Complainant/Petitioner Appearance:- For Complainant: For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer CGRF Hisar 2 Respondent SDO XEN (OP) Divn No.1 DHBVN, Hisar SDO (OP) City DHBVN, Hisar Present.Respondents

52 ORDER Smt. Sunita w/o Sh. Anil Kumar, HN 266/Sector-14, Hisar has got an electricity connection bearing account No under SDO (OP) City Hisar, hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. The complainant has filed present complaint stating therein that on a wrong bill has been issued to her by levying excess units. She checked the meter and found that reading is not visible. She contacted the office of respondent Nigam and meter was replaced by him. She further submitted that her meter was not checked from the Lab and wrong bill was issued without reading. The complainant requested for redressal her grievances. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Hisar for hearing of the case. The proceedings held at Hisar on The complainant and respondent SDO were present. SDO submitted written reply vide No dated stating therein that bill of consumer is correct as bill was raised on actual reading recorded by the meter. During argument he further submitted that during the month of April to August 2233 reading has been recorded by meter which is incommensurate with reading recorded during corresponding period of last year. He requested the forum to file the complaint as bill is correct. He placed on record consumption data from Jan.16 to March-18, copy of MCO and checking report of Lab. After going through the record available on file and hearing the parties the Forum decides to dispose of the complaint as there is no merit in the complaint of complainant. Respondent charged the amount in accordance with the instructions of the Licensee as well as that of HERC. Case is closed. Party to bear their own cost. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 6 th April, (K.D.Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

53 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2101/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing Dated of Order Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: 1 K.D.Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman 2 Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of M/S Indus Tower Ltd. (Samani, Bhuna, Fatehabad) SCO-137/First Floor, Sector-13, UE Karnal(through Mr. MS Chauhan) regarding wrong billing V/s.. Complainant/Petitioner Appearance:- For Complainant: For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer CGRF Hisar 2 Respondent SDO XEN (OP) Divn DHBVN, Tohana SDO (OP) DHBVN, Bhuna Present.Respondents

54 ORDER M/S Indus Tower Ltd. (Samani, Bhuna & Fatehabad) SCO-137/First Floor, Sector-13, UE Karnal (through Mr. MS Chauhan) has got an electricity connection bearing account No. SE-21/1405 under SDO (OP) Bhuna, hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. The complainant has filed present complaint stating therein that they had applied for permanent disconnection to SDO (O) Bhuna and connection was not disconnected on our request despite our regular visit to the o/o SDO. Connected was disconnected on and entry of PDCO has not been made till date. Bills are raised on average basis from 12/16 to-date despite removal of meter 5 months back. He further submitted that meter was working OK on the date of PDCO i.e. on but neither working nor final reading was entered at the time of PDCO. The complainant requested for redressal their grievances. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Hisar for hearing of the case. The proceedings held at Hisar on The complainant and respondent SDO were present. SDO submitted written reply vide No dated stating therein that PDCO of subject cited connection was issued on vide PDCO NO.53/1484 and same was effected on in the presence of M&P team. After effecting PDCO meter and CT of consumer was sent to Lab for testing of accuracy and recording of reading. Since the display of meter was not visible, meter was sent to manufacturing company for further investigation of reading and accuracy. At the time of checking in Lab, one No. M&T seal and both firm seals were found broken. He further submitted that ACD of consumer shall be adjusted after overhauling the account of consumer as per reading reported by manufacturing firm. He also placed on record copy of consumer request dated , copy of PDCO, M&T report dated , Lab report dated and Consumer was present who argued that they have made a request on for disconnection and PDCO was not effected by S/Dn despite their request. He placed on record the copy of request dated He further submitted that they were not using supply after and therefore not liable for any charges. SDO further stated that on the request of consumer PDCO No.53/1484 was effected by area incharge on by disconnecting the supply from pole. At the time of disconnection, on pole final reading was not visible and working of meter was reported as burnt. He further submitted that the application put up by complainant is not available in their record. After going through the record available on file and hearing the parties the Forum decides to dispose of the complaint with the direction that MMC may be recovered from the complainant from to instead of average charges since reading of meter was not visible at the time of disconnection by the field staff from pole. The account of consumer may be overhauled after receipt of report and final reading from the manufacturing firm. Case is closed. Party to bear their own cost.

55 As required under Haryana State Electricity Regulatory Commission (Guidelines for establishment of Forum for Redressal of Grievances of consumers, Electricity Ombudsman and Consumer Advocacy) Regulations-2016, the implementation of this decision may be intimated to this office within 30 days from the date of its receipt. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 9 th April, (K.D.Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

56 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2102/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing Dated of Order Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: 1 K.D.Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman 2 Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of M/S Indus Tower Ltd. (Nehla Fatehabad) SCO-137/First Floor, Sector-13, UE Karnal(through Mr. MS Chauhan) regarding wrong billing V/s.. Complainant/Petitioner Appearance:- For Complainant: For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer CGRF Hisar 2 Respondent SDO XEN (OP) Divn DHBVN, Tohana SDO (OP) DHBVN, Bhuna Present.Respondents

57 ORDER M/S Indus Tower Ltd. (Nehla, Fatehabad) SCO-137/First Floor, Sector-13, UE Karnal (through Mr. MS Chauhan) has got an electricity connection bearing account No. NL-21/2509 under SDO (OP) City Hisar, hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. The complainant has filed present complaint stating therein that they had applied for permanent disconnection to SDO (O) Bhuna and connection was not disconnected on our request despite our regular visit to the o/o SDO. Connected was disconnected on and entry of PDCO has not been made till date. Bills are raised on average basis from 12/16 to-date despite removal of meter 5-6 months back. He further submitted that meter was working OK on the date of PDCO i.e. on but neither working nor final reading was entered at the time of PDCO. The complainant requested for redressal their grievances. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Hisar for hearing of the case. The proceedings held at Hisar on The complainant and respondent SDO were present. SDO submitted written reply vide No dated stating therein that PDCO of subject cited connection was issued on vide PDCO NO.54/1484 and same was effected on He further submitted that MMC has been charged upto date of PDCO and average charge has been adjusted vide SC&AR No.917/143 dated amounting to Rs ACD of consumer has also been adjusted in the consumer a/c vide SC&AR No.932/143 dated against pending defaulting amount. Consumer was present who argued that they have made a request on for disconnection and PDCO was not effected by S/Dn despite their request. He placed on record the copy of request dated He further submitted that they were not using supply after and therefore not liable for any charges. SDO further stated that on the request of consumer PDCO No.54/1484 was effected by area incharge on by disconnecting the supply from pole. At the time of disconnection, on pole final reading was and working of meter was reported as OK. He further submitted that the application put up by complainant is not available in their record. After going through the record available on file and hearing the parties the Forum decides to dispose of the complaint with the direction that MMC may not be recovered from the complainant from to as final reading at the time of disconnection was same as the reading recorded during the month of 10/2017 which substantiates the statement of complainant. ACD of consumer may be adjusted in the month of Jan.2017 and surcharge levied if any on the defaulting amount equal to ACD may be refunded. Case is closed. Party to bear their own cost.

58 As required under Haryana State Electricity Regulatory Commission (Guidelines for establishment of Forum for Redressal of Grievances of consumers, Electricity Ombudsman and Consumer Advocacy) Regulations-2016, the implementation of this decision may be intimated to this office within 30 days from the date of its receipt. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 9 th April, (K.D.Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

59 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2113/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing Dated of Order Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: 1 K.D.Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman 2 Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of Smt. Bimla Devi w/o Sh. Kailash Chander, Bhagat Singh Nagar, Ward No.8, Gali No.8, Hisar regarding wrong billing V/s.. Complainant/Petitioner Appearance:- For Complainant: For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer CGRF Hisar 2 Respondent SDO XEN (OP) Divn No.1 DHBVN, Hisar SDO (OP) City DHBVN, Hisar Present.Respondents

60 ORDER Smt. Bimla Devi w/o Sh. Kailash Chander, Bhagat Singh Nagar, Ward No.8, Gali No.8, Hisar has got an electricity connection bearing account No under SDO (OP) City Hisar, hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. The complainant has filed present complaint stating therein that wrong billing has been issued to her by showing a unit of 2547 in two months. The complainant requested for redressal her grievances. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Hisar for hearing of the case. The proceedings held at Hisar on The complainant and respondent SDO were present. SDO did not submit any reply. However he argued the case and stated that MCO was effected during the month of 11/2016 and same could not be entered in the system upto July However the account of consumer was overhauled and an amount of Rs vide SC&AR No.580/96 and an amount of Rs has been adjusted by the software in the month of July At present a bill of Rs is outstanding against consumer. He also submitted that consumer made a complaint in CM window portal regarding correction of bill and same has been filed during 01/2018. Consumer was present who argued the case in line with written submission. He stated that bill raised to her has been paid by her and accumulation of reading if any of the fault of Nigam and she is not responsible for the same. She stressed upon that she may not be charged on a/c of wrong reading. SDO contested the arguments of complainant and submitted that meter of the consumer got checked from Lab and working found OK. SDO also submitted written reply vide No dated alongwith copy of SC&AR register, MCO and complaint of consumer on the CM Window portal. After going through the record available on file and hearing the parties the Forum decides to dispose of the complaint as there is no merit in the complaint of complainant. Case is closed. Party to bear their own cost. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 9 th April, (K.D.Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

61 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar Telephone No (website: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2115/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: Date of Order: Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: 1 K.D.Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman 2 Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of complaint of Sh. Ishwar Singh, Sheetalpuri Colony, Narwana Road, Jind regarding wrong billing V/s.. Complainant/Petitioner XEN (OP) DHBVN, Jind SDO (OP) S/U I DHBVN, Jind.Respondents Appearance:- For Complainant: Present For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer CGRF Hisar 2 Respondent SDO

62 ORDER Sh. Ishwar Singh, Sheetalpuri Colony, Narwana Road Jind has got an electricity connection bearing account No. SK-11/2153 under (OP) S/U I, Jind has made a complaint and hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint The complainant has filed the present complaint stating therein that bill of Rs has been issued to him. He got the meter checked which is found OK but still a bill of Rs has been raised to him. He is making payment of bills regularly and there is no fault on his part. He requested to get his complaint redressed. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Hisar for hearing of the case. The proceedings held at Hisar on The complainant and respondent SDO were present. The respondent SDO filed written reply vide no dated stating therein that the bill of consumer has been corrected as per consumption basis. He further submitted that meter was replaced in the month of 3/2015 and bill has been corrected for to on the basis of consumption recorded and payments made by complainant during the period has also been adjusted. Reading of the meter was found to be 5342 as on He also placed on record the copy of calculation sheet. Consumer was present who submitted that he is making the payment regularly and now is not in a position to make the payment in one lot. He requested the forum to allow him payment in installments without surcharge. After going through the record on file and hearing the party, the Forum finds that it is a case of accumulation of reading and bill has been corrected by respondent SDO as per the instructions/tariff applicable and reading recorded by meter as is evident from photo of meter reading placed on record. However, Forum decides to accept the pending amount in three installments alongwith current bill without levying surcharge on the balance amount. The case is closed. Both the parties to bear their own cost. As required under Haryana State Electricity Regulatory Commission (Guidelines for establishment of Forum for Redressal of Grievances of consumers, Electricity Ombudsman and Consumer Advocacy) Regulations-2016, the implementation of this decision may be intimated to this office within 30 days from the date of its receipt. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 9 th April, (K.D.Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

63 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2105/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: Date of Order : Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: K.D Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of complaint of Sh. Amar Singh s/o Sh. Puran Singh, VPO Bawania, Narnaul, Mohindergarh regarding correction of bill V/s.. Complainant/Petitioner XEN (OP) DHBVN Mohindergarh SDO (OP) S/Divn DHBVN Mohindergarh Appearance:-.Respondents For Complainant: Present For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer CGRF DHBVN Hisar. 2 Respondent SDO

64 ORDER Sh. Amar Singh s/o Sh. Puran Singh, VPO Bawania, Narnaul, Mohindergarh has got an electricity connection bearing account No. BW/1DD457 under SDO, OP DHBVN, Mohindergarh hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. He filed the present complaint stating that he is getting wrong bill since last two months. He requested the Forum to redress his grievance. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Narnaul for hearing of the case. The proceedings held at Narnaul on The complainant and respondent SDO were present. SDO submitted reply vide memo No. 195 dated stating therein that meter of above consumer was changed vide MCO NO.34/751 dated Earlier bill was raised on D-code by charging 80 units bimonthly. At the time of changing the meter, the reading was found whereas billing was made upto 6986 reading and difference of reading charged to consumer. He further submitted that account of consumer has been overhauled on and consumer is satisfied with the correction of bill. SDO also submitted on record the copies of sundry and revised bill. The consumer was present who was satisfied with the reply and stated that he has paid the balance payment after correction. After considering facts of the case and hearing the parties, the Forum decides to dispose of complaint as grievance of consumer has already been redressed.. Case is closed. No cost on either side. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 19 th April, (K.D.Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

65 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2106/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: Date of Order : Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: K.D Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of complaint of Sh. Hari Ram s/o Sh. Kalu Ram, VPO Akbarpur, Mohindergarh regarding shifting of line V/s.. Complainant/Petitioner XEN (OP) DHBVN Narnaul SDO (OP) S/Divn DHBVN Nangal Chaudhary Appearance:-.Respondents For Complainant: Present For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer CGRF DHBVN Hisar. 2 Respondent SDO

66 ORDER Sh. Hari Ram s/o Sh. Kalu Ram, VPO Akbarpur, Mohindergarh has got an electricity connection under SDO, OP DHBVN Nangal Chaudhary hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. He filed the present complaint stating that he is resident of village Akbarpur and HT/LT line is passing through his plot. The plot is situated inside the Lal Dora and requested the Forum to get the line shifted. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Narnaul for hearing of the case. The proceedings held at Narnaul on The complainant and respondent SDO were present. SDO stated that he could not prepared reply due to late receipt of complaint and assured that reply will be submitted by next working date. Reply was submitted reply vide memo No. 814 dated stating therein that estimate for subject cited shifting of HT LT line has been framed and work will be carried out on departmental basis. Consumer was present who argued his case in line with written submission and also submitted a report from revenue authorities verifying the facts of location of residence. Original copy of same was given to respondent SDO. After considering facts of the case and hearing the parties, the Forum decides to dispose of complaint with the direction that line passing through the house of complainant may be shifted at the cost of Nigam as the house of complainant is located within the Lal Dora.. Case is closed. No cost on either side. As required under Haryana State Electricity Regulatory Commission (Guidelines for establishment of Forum for Redressal of Grievances of consumers, Electricity Ombudsman and Consumer Advocacy) Regulations-2016, the implementation of this decision may be intimated to this office within 30 days from the date of its receipt. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 19 th April, (K.D.Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

67 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2107/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: Date of Order : Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: K.D Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of complaint of Smt. Shubhali d/o Sh. Harphool, VPO Karota, Narnaul, Mohindergarh regarding release of connection V/s.. Complainant/Petitioner XEN (OP) DHBVN Narnaul SDO (OP) S/Divn DHBVN Nangal Chaudhary Appearance:-.Respondents For Complainant: None For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer CGRF DHBVN Hisar. 2 Respondent SDO

68 ORDER Smt. Shubhali d/o Sh. Harphool, VPO Karota, Narnaul, Mohindergarh has applied for S/Phase electricity connection under SDO, OP DHBVN Nangal Chaudhary hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. She filed the present complaint stating that she is residing at his well since last few years. Due to canal water her well has become operational. She requested to get S/P connection released at her well. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Narnaul for hearing of the case. The proceedings held at Narnaul on The complainant was not present but respondent SDO was present. SDO submitted reply vide his memo No. 806 dated stating therein that subject cited complainant has not applied for release of any connection to his office. He further submitted that after going through the contents of application, it is gathered that complainant is interested in taking connection for AP category which is prohibited in Nangal Chaudhary block being dark zone area. He requested the forum to file the complaint. Neither the complainant nor her representative was present during the hearing. After considering facts of the case and hearing the parties, the Forum decides to dispose of complaint as there is no merit in the complaint and AP connection can not be released in dark zone area. Case is closed. No cost on either side. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 19 th April, (K.D.Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

69 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2109/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: Date of Order : Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: K.D Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of complaint of Sh. Ramesh Chand s/o Sh. Ram Niwas, near Railway Phatak, Dhanoa Road, Ateli Mandi regarding replacement of conductor and pole V/s.. Complainant/Petitioner XEN (OP) DHBVN Narnaul SDO (OP) S/Divn DHBVN Ateli Mandi Appearance:-.Respondents For Complainant: None For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer CGRF DHBVN Hisar. 2 Respondent SDO

70 ORDER Sh. Ramesh Chand s/o Sh. Ram Niwas, near Railway Phatak, Dhanoa Road, Ateli Mandi has got an electricity connection bearing account No. CT-31/007SP under SDO, OP DHBVN Ateli Mandi hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. He filed the present complaint stating that during March 2015 two poles fell down due to rain and windstorm. The line was connected to H Pole of Reliance Co. Nigam has assured that poles shall be erected in due course but till date poles have not been erected so far. He requested the Forum to redress his grievance. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Narnaul for hearing of the case. The proceedings held at Narnaul on The complainant was not present and respondent SDO was present. SDO submitted reply vide memo No dated stating therein that existing HT line is far away from the house of complainant and there is no hindrance to the residence of complainant. He further stated that existing line is as per standard and horizontal/vertical clearance is as per norms, He also put the photos of site sketch of the line. Neither complainant nor his representative was present. After considering facts of the case and hearing the parties, the Forum decides to dispose of complaint as there is no merit of complaint and line is erected properly with proper clearance. Case is closed. No cost on either side. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 19 th April, (K.D.Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

71 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2110/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: Date of Order : Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: K.D Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of complaint of Sh. Umrao Singh s/o Sh. Shed Shai, Village Khanpur, PO Mandhana, Tehsil,Narnaul, Distt Mohindergarh regarding wrong billing V/s.. Complainant/Petitioner XEN (OP) DHBVN Narnaul SDO (OP) S/U S/Divn DHBVN Narnaul Appearance:-.Respondents For Complainant: Present For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer CGRF DHBVN Hisar. 2 Respondent SDO

72 ORDER Sh. Umrao Singh s/o Sh. Shed Shai, Village Khanpur, PO Mandhana, Tehsil Narnaul, Distt. Mohindergarh, has got an electricity connection bearing account No. RR1D-2250 under SDO, OP S/U DHBVN Narnaul hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. He filed the present complaint stating that since last two months he is getting abnormal bills. On dated he received a bill of Rs and same was paid by him. Again during March a bill of Rs has been raised which is wrong and is not commensurate with his consumption. He requested the Forum to redress his grievance. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Narnaul for hearing of the case. The proceedings held at Narnaul on The complainant and respondent SDO were present. SDO submitted reply vide No. 199 dated stating therein that bill of complainant has been rectified vide SC&AR No.82/286 and an amount of Rs has been adjusted. The consumer was present who was satisfied with the adjustment of bill. After considering facts of the case and hearing the parties, the Forum decides to dispose of complaint as complaint has already been redressed. Case is closed. No cost on either side. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 19 th April, (K.D.Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

73 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2108/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: Date of Order : Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: K.D Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of complaint of Sh. Rakesh Yadav PACS the M/Bachhod Primary Agriculture Co-Op Socieity Ltd. Bachhold, Distt Mohindergarh regarding wrong billing V/s.. Complainant/Petitioner XEN (OP) DHBVN Narnaul SDO (OP) S/U S/Divn DHBVN Ateli. Appearance:-.Respondents For Complainant: None For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer CGRF DHBVN Hisar. 2 Respondent SDO

74 ORDER Sh. Rakesh Yadav PACS the M/Bachhod Primary Agriculture Co-Op Socieity Ltd. Bachhold, Distt Mohindergarh, has got an electricity connection bearing account No. B under SDO, OP DHBVN Ateli hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. He filed the present complaint stating that wrong bills are issued to them since Dec He is visiting S/D office since then but no action has been by the S/D He requested the Forum to redress his grievance. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Narnaul for hearing of the case. The proceedings held at Narnaul on The complainant was not present but respondent SDO was present. SDO submitted reply vide No dated stating therein that bill of consumer has been corrected and balance payment has been made by the complainant and as such he is satisfied with the correction of bill. SDO placed on record the copy of sundry and ledger. Neither complainant nor his representative was present. After considering facts of the case and hearing the parties, the Forum decides to file the complaint as complaint has already been redressed. Case is closed. No cost on either side. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 19 th April, (K.D.Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

75

76 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2120/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: Date of Order Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: K.D.Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the complaint of Sh. Bani Singh s/o Hari Chand, HN 3462, Sayad Sarai, Rewari regarding wrong billing V/s XEN (OP) Divn. DHBVN, Rewari SDO (OP) City-2, DHBVN, Rewari.. Complainant/Petitioner Appearance:- For Complainant: Present.Respondents For the Respondent Nodal Officer CGRF Hisar. Respondent SDO

77 ORDER Sh. Bani Singh s/o Hari Chand, HN 3462, Sayad Sarai, Rewari has got an electricity connection bearing account No under SDO, OP City-2. DHBVN Rewari hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. He filed the present complaint stating therein that he is getting very high bill due to billing in KVAH. He made a complaint to Nigam SDO and on being enquired found that difference in KVAH and KWH reading is due to non installation of capacitor. In the month of December he got the capacitor installed. He requested the Forum to redress his grievance. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Narnaul for hearing of the case. The proceedings held at Narnaul on The complainant and respondent SDO were present. SDO submitted reply vide memo No.1142 dated stating therein that meter of above consumer was replaced on for installing KVAH facility meter. After that billing of consumer is being done KVAH reading. There is difference in KVAH and KWH reading as consumer had not installed the proper capacitor. He further submitted that they have informed the consumer to get meter checked from Lab if he agrees. SDO also placed on record the ledger copy and letter written to complainant regarding checking of meter from Lab. Complainant was present who argued his case in line with written submission and submitted that he was not aware about the lower capacity of capacitor and he was also not informed by the Nigam. Bill was raised to him for four moths resulting in loss to him. After considering facts of the case and hearing the parties, the Forum decides to dispose of complaint as there is no merit in the complaint.. Case is closed. No cost on either side. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 19 th April, (K.D.Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

78 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2114/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: Date of Order: Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: 1. K D Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman 2 Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of complaint of Sh. Harminder Singh s/o Sh. Pardhan Singh, HN 34/D Block CMK College Road Sirsa, regarding wrong billing V/s.. Complainant/Petitioner 1 Xen/Op. City Division, DHBVN, Sirsa 2 SDO (OP) I/A DHBVN, Sirsa.Respondents Appearance:- For Complainant: Representative For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer/CGRF, DHBVN, Hisar 2 Representative of Respondent SDO

79 ORDER Sh. Harminder Singh s/o Sh. Pardhan Singh, HN 34/D Block CMK College Road Sirsa, has got an electricity connection bearing account No under SDO/Op I/A DHBVN, Sirsa, hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. The complainant has filed the present complaint stating therein that wrong bill has been issued to him in March-2018 amounting to Rs which is wrong. He requested Forum to get his grievance redressed. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Sirsa for hearing of the case. The proceedings were held at Sirsa on Consumer s representative and SDO s representatives were present. SDO submitted written reply vide memo No dated stating therein that complainant has a domestic connection with sanctioned load as 1.9 KW. Premises of consumer was checked on vide LL1 No.35/653. He was found using unauthorized load and reading of meter was found invisible. Meter was sent to Lab for verification but reading could not be retrieved by the Lab. He also submitted on record copy of LL1 dated , Lab report dated and consumption data of consumer from to Consumer argued the case in line with written statement and stated that average for the month of 12/2017 to 02/2018 has been charged as per average of summer season whereas consumption recorded during the month is less as it is a winter season. He requested the Forum to charge the amount as per corresponding month. After hearing both the parties and going through the record, the Forum decides to dispose of the complaint with the direction that bill for the period top may be charged on the basis of consumption recorded in the corresponding period of last year and same may be increased in proportionate of extended load found. Case is closed. No cost on either side. As required under Haryana State Electricity Regulatory Commission (Guidelines for establishment of Forum for Redressal of Grievances of consumers, Electricity Ombudsman and Consumer Advocacy) Regulations-2016, the implementation of this decision may be intimated to this office within 30 days from the date of its receipt. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 20 th April, (K.D. Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

80 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2125/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: Date of Order: Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: 1. K D Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman 2 Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of complaint of Sh. Singara Singh s/o Sh. Karnail Singh, Village Lahangewala, PO Bada Gudha, Sirsa, regarding release of tubewell connection V/s.. Complainant/Petitioner 1 Xen/Op. City Division, DHBVN, Dabwali 2 SDO (OP) DHBVN, Kalanwali.Respondents Appearance:- For Complainant: Present For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer/CGRF, DHBVN, Hisar 2 Representative of Respondent SDO

81 ORDER Sh. Singara Singh s/o Sh. Karnail Singh, Village Lahangewala, PO Bada Gudha, Sirsa, has applied for an electricity tubewell connection under SDO/OP DHBVN, Kalanwali, hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. The complainant has filed the present complaint stating therein that he applied for tubewell connection 7-8 years back. Evan an amount of Rs had been deposited with the Nigam but since last 5 years connection has not been released to him nor any notice was given. He requested Forum to get his grievance redressed. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Sirsa for hearing of the case. The proceedings were held at Sirsa on Consumer was present and representative of SDO were present. SDO did not submit written reply on the plea that reply could not be prepared due to non availability of respondent SDO. However, he submitted that application of complainant has been cancelled on due to non compliance of demand notice. Consumer applied for renewal of application on i.e. after a period of more than two years. Application could not be renewed as it was applied after the stipulated period of two years. He further submitted that demand notice was issued to him on and third and last notice was issued to consumer vide memo No.119 dated Consumer was present who stated that he is visiting the office since last 5 years and neither the demand notice was handed over to him nor any notice was received by him. The delay in filing application for renewal is circumstantial and not intentional. After hearing both the parties and going through the record, the Forum decides to dispose of the complaint as there is no merit in the complaint. Case is closed. No cost on either side. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 20 th April, (K.D. Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

82 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2127/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: Date of Order: Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: 1. K D Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman 2 Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of complaint of Sh. Puran Chand s/o Sh. Manohar Lal, Mohalla Sikligar, Ward No.1, Chattargarh Patti, Sirsa, regarding wrong billing V/s.. Complainant/Petitioner 1 Xen/Op. City Division, DHBVN, Sirsa 2 SDO (OP) I/A DHBVN, Sirsa.Respondents Appearance:- For Complainant: None For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer/CGRF, DHBVN, Hisar 2 Representative of Respondent SDO

83 ORDER Sh. Puran Chand s/o Sh. Manohar Lal, Mohalla Sikligar, Ward No.1, Chattargarh Patti, Sirsa, has got an electricity connection bearing account No under SDO/Op I/A DHBVN, Sirsa, hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. The complainant has filed the present complaint stating therein that due to illness he could not make the payment of electricity bill and supply was disconnected on a defaulting amount of Rs but his bill has been increased to Rs without any reason. He requested Forum to get his grievance redressed. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear b efore the Forum on at Sirsa for hearing of the case. The proceedings were held at Sirsa on Consumer was not present but representative of SDO was present. SDO submitted written reply vide memo No dated stating therein that due to defaulting amount the connection of consumer was disconnected on An amount of Rs was outstanding against the consumer at the time of disconnection. Surcharge has been levied on the outstanding amount upto 6 months resulting in increase of amount. Complaint of consumer is baseless and needs to be filed. Neither the complainant nor his representative was present. After hearing both the parties and going through the record, the Forum decides to dispose of the complaint with no direction as there is no merit in the complaint of complainant. Case is closed. No cost on either side. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 20 th April, (K.D. Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

84 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2062/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: Date of Order: Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: 1 K.D.Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman 2 Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of complaint of Sh. Jagbir Singh s/o Sh Bihari Lal, Rohtak Road, Ch. Dadri Bhiwani regarding wrong billing... Complainant/Petitioner V/s 1 Xen (OP) Division, DHBVN, Ch. Dadri 2 SDO (OP)City DHBVN, Ch. Dadri Appearance:-.Respondents For Complainant: Present For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer/CGRF, DHBVN, Hisar 2 Representative of Respondent SDO

85 ORDER Sh. Jagbir Singh s/o Sh Bihari Lal, Rohtak Road, Ch. Dadri got an electricity connection bearing account No under SDO (OP) City DHBVN Ch. Dadri, hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. The complainant has filed the present complaint stating therein that has been billed wrongly for fixed charges and average billing even after meter is running OK an after replacement of old meter. The complainant requested for the waival of wrong surcharge for taking action against the official who could not serve correct bill even after meter running OK. He also requested for waival of fixed charges. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Bhiwani for hearing of the case. Proceedings of the case were held at Bhiwani on The complainant & representative of respondent SDO were present. The respondent SDO filed written reply vide No. 860 dated stating therein that after going through the contents of complaint and scrutinizing the ledger of subject cited consumer it has been found that wrongly levied fixed charges were adjusted during April-2013 alongwith surcharge. The bills which were wrongly billed on average have also been rectified and adjusted on time. He also submitted that consumer made payment of Rs.1.0 lac during April-2013 and no payment was made thereafter. At present an amount of Rs is outstanding at the end of Feb.2018 which is correct and payable by consumer. He also placed on record ledger copy from Jan.2012 to Feb Reply of SDO was given to consumer who argued that average charged to him during Nov.2013 to Jan.2014 has not been adjusted. Similarly, average billed from Nov.2015 to July-2017 has not been adjusted. Representative of SDO was present who contested that average charged during Nov.2013 to Jan.2014 has been adjusted in Feb Similarly average charged from May to July has been adjusted during July After going through the record on case file and hearing the parties, the Forum finds that there is no merit in the complaint as average charged to the consumer alongwith fixed charges levied and surcharge on this amount stands adjusted. Complaint is disposed of with no direction. Case is closed. Both the parties to bear their own costs. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 16 th March, (K.D.Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

86 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2063/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: Date of Order: Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: 1 K.D.Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman 2 Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of complaint of Smt. Darshna Devi w/o Sh Lilu, VPO Umrawat Bhiwani regarding wrong billing... Complainant/Petitioner V/s 1 Xen (OP) Division, DHBVN, Bhiwani 2 SDO (OP)S/U No.2 DHBVN, Ch. Dadri Appearance:-.Respondents For Complainant: Present For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer/CGRF, DHBVN, Hisar 2 Representative of Respondent SDO

87 ORDER Smt. Darshna Devi w/o Sh Lilu, VPO Umrawat Bhiwani got an electricity connection bearing account No. TU1D-0433 under SDO (OP) S/UNo.2 DHBVN Bhiwani, hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. The complainant has filed the present complaint stating therein that she opted for surcharge waival scheme and deposited around Rs in installments but amount has not been reduced from the bills alongwith surcharge. The complainant requested to redressed her complaint. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Bhiwani for hearing of the case. Proceedings of the case were held at Bhiwani on The complainant & respondent SDO were present. The respondent SDO filed written reply vide No.1050 dated stating therein that consumer has paid Rs respectively in four installments and same amount has already been posted in her account. Account of consumer has also been overhauled and an amount of Rs has been refunded vide SC&AR No.322/93. He further submitted that an amount of Rs is outstanding against her and surcharge shall be refunded only after payment of last installment. Consumer was present who stated that surcharge should be refunded, payment, if any shall be paid by her. After going through the record on case file and hearing the parties, the Forum finds that an installment of payment is due against the payment and surcharge can only be refunded if she complied with the instructions issued under surcharge waival scheme. The form decides to dispose of complaint in viw of reply submitted by SDO as there is no merit in the complaint. Case is closed. Both the parties to bear their own costs. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 16 th March, (K.D.Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

88 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2096/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: Date of Order: Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: 1 K.D.Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman 2 Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of complaint of Sh. Mahender Rana on behalf of M/S Indus Tower Ltd.(Sanwar Ch.Dadri) SCO 137, FF, Sector-13/UE Karnal regarding wrong billing... Complainant/Petitioner V/s 1 Xen (OP) Division, DHBVN, Ch. Dadri 2 SDO (OP)No.2 DHBVN, Sanjarwas Appearance:-.Respondents For Complainant: Present For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer/CGRF, DHBVN, Hisar 2 Representative of Respondent SDO

89 ORDER M/S Indus Tower Ltd.(Sanwar Ch.Dadri) SCO 137, FF, Sector-13/UE Karnal (through Sh. Mahender Rana) got an electricity connection bearing account No. CS-21/0166 under SDO (OP) DHBVN Sanjarwas, hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. The complainant has filed the present complaint stating therein that wrong bill from 8/11 to 6/16 has not been adjusted after replacement of meter vide MCO No.16/103 dated They took up matter with respondent SDO on but no action was taken by him. He further submitted that a wrong reading was recorded in Jan.2016 and Feb.2016 resulting in excess billing of units. He further submitted that meter was checked on and as per M&P checking report the MF of meter is.6 which remained same upto 6/16. Billing was not made during this period on actual MF and thus excess units of have been charged to them. The complainant requested to redress their complaint. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Bhiwani for hearing of the case. Proceedings of the case were held at Bhiwani on The representative of complainant & respondent SDO were present. The respondent SDO filed written reply vide No. 753 dated stating therein that bills for the period 8/11 to 8/14 were raised on average basis as per sanctioned load and as such question of application of wrong MF in energy bills during this period does not arise. For the period 9/14 to 6/16 bill was raised by taking units on average basis and considering MF as one. Amount of Rs has already been given in the account for average/wrong billing and refund was given MF as one so question of refund by treating MF as.6 is not justified. He also submitted that an amount of Rs has been given in SC&AR No.185/103 on in the bill of 1/2018. Amount of FSA charged in 5/16 and 6/16 has already been refunded in 11/2017. Question of refund of amount Rs paid on line by complainant has already been refunded in 10/2015. He requested the Forum to file complaint as all the necessary adjustments have already been made. SDO also placed on record the copy of ledger from Jan,2011 to 3/2018 showing an outstanding of (-) Rs against the consumer. SDO also raised the question of time bar as he did not raise any question regarding provisional billing before whereas wrong bill was issued in 8/2011. The consumer was present and contested that since sundry has been made in the month of 11/17 so the cause of action arose during 11/17 and complaint is within time. He also contested that wrong reading was corrected by making adjustment of Rs is not correct as FSA has not been accounted for. He also contested that provisional reading raised form 8/11 to 8/14 was also adjustable as per actual MF.

90 that After going through the record on case file and hearing the parties, the Forum observed 1. Provisional billing has been made from 8/11 to Jan.2014 so the contention of complainant that billing was raised on provisional basis is not correct. Reading recorded during Jan.2014 was units. 2. Form also observed that an amount of Rs has been allowed in April 2013 and an amount of Rs in Feb.,2015, April-2015 and Rs in July Rs has been adjusted in Oct On going through the record, the forum finds no merit in complaint and therefore decides to dispose of the complaint with no direction. Case is closed. Both the parties to bear their own costs. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 16 th March, (K.D.Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

91 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2097/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: Date of Order: Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: 1 K.D.Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman 2 Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of complaint of Mahender Singh on behalf of M/S Indus Tower Ltd.(Sanwar Ch.Dadri) SCO 137, FF, Sector-13/UE Karnal regarding wrong billing... Complainant/Petitioner V/s 1 Xen (OP) Division, DHBVN, Ch. Dadri 2 SDO (OP) DHBVN, Sanjarwas Appearance:-.Respondents For Complainant: Present For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer/CGRF, DHBVN, Hisar 2 Representative of Respondent SDO

92 ORDER M/S Indus Tower Ltd.(Sanwar Ch.Dadri) SCO 137, FF, Sector-13/UE Karnal (through Sh. Mahender Rana) got an electricity connection bearing account No. CS-21/0168 under SDO (OP) DHBVN Sanjarwas, hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. The complainant has filed the present complaint stating therein that an amount of Rs has been wrongly debited in their account. They took up matter with respondent SDO on but no action was taken by him. He further submitted that old meter was replaced with LT CT meter on and MF was reported to be 6.0. He further submitted that the bill for 11/2013 to 1/2014 was raised for 6400 units by taking MF 1.0 whereas as per M&P report dated reading of meter is 4926 KWH and thus excess amount has been charged to them. The complainant requested to redress their complaint. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Bhiwani for hearing of the case. Proceedings of the case were held at Bhiwani on The representative of complainant & representative of respondent SDO were present. The respondent SDO filed written reply vide No. 752 dated stating therein that meter was replaced as per Lab report from whole current meter to LT CT Meter on with MF as 6.0. Bill was raised for 6400 units from Nov.2013 to Jan.2014 for 6400 units by taking MF as 1.0. Bill was corrected as pointed out audit party by taking MF 6.0. and refunding the units already charged to consumer. He submitted that since Mf was corrected and amount charges correct so complaint may be filed. The consumer was present and contested the version of SDO and sted that as per report of M&P reading 4926 on so his account cannot be overhauled on the basis of 6400 units taking arbitrarily. After going through the record on case file and hearing the parties, the Forum finds that wrong charges have been levied against consumer and therefore decides that account of consumer may be overhauled from 11/2013 to as per actual reading and excess charge if any may be refunded to them. Case is closed. Both the parties to bear their own costs. As required under Haryana State Electricity Regulatory Commission (Guidelines for establishment of Forum for Redressal of Grievances of consumers, Electricity Ombudsman and Consumer Advocacy) Regulations-2016, the implementation of this decision may be intimated to this office within 30 days from the date of its receipt. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 16 th March, (K.D.Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

93 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar Hisar Telephone No (website: ( id: Case No. DH/CGRF- 1984/2017 Date of Institution: 07/12/2017 Date of Hearing: 22/12/2017, & Date of Order: Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: 1 K.D.Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman 2 Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of complaint of Sh. Virender Singh, Flat NO.401,Shivalik Apartment, Sector-46, Faridabad regarding wrong billing. V/s.. Complainant/Petitioner 1 XEN (OP) Divn. DHBVN, Old Faridabad 2 SDO (OP) Sub Divn.No.4, DHBVN, Faridabad Appearance:- For Complainant: Present.Respondents For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer CGRF Hisar. 2 Respondent SDO

94 ORDER Sh. Virender Singh, Flat No. 401,Shivalik Apartment Sector-46, Faridabad has got an electricity connection bearing account No under (OP) Sub-Division No.4, DHBVN, Faridabad hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. The complainant has filed the present complaint stating therein that his meter was running fast resulting into high consumption of electricity during the period 7/2014 to 11/2015 which has no parity with past consumption of same period. The Nigam removed the meter for checking. However the meter lost before actual checking. His bill has not been corrected without any fault at his end. He requested for redressal of grievance by correcting the bill. The complainant has further stated that an appeal in the same matter filed before the consumer court of Faridabad and still pending for adjudication The case was heard during the sitting of CGRF at Faridabad on and complainant was informed that no proceedings in the matter can be conducted by this forum as the matter is already pending before the Consumer Court at Faridabad. The consumer requested the Forum to keep the case listed as he intends to withdraw the case from the Consumer Court at Faridabad and submit the withdrawal proof on next date. On the written request of complainant, the case is adjourned to next date. Proceedings were held at Faridabad on Complainant was present during the sitting at Faridabad on and requested to keep the case pending in the Forum till another date as the formality of withdrawal of case is under process at his end. As per request case is adjourned to next date. Proceedings were held at Faridabad on Complainant and respondent SDO were present. Complainant produced the copy of orders passed by permanent Lok Adalat regarding withdrawal of his complaint. Consumer submitted that a bill of Rs was raised to him for to He approached the Licensee to rectify the bill as his meter was running very fast resulting in high consumption of electricity. On his request, official of DHBVN visited his premises and removed meter for Lab examination. He further submitted that department lost the meter before testing from Lab and refused to rectify his bill on the basis of past and future consumption. SDO was present and submitted that consumer was billed on average basis for the month of 5/2015 to 11/15 and average consumption billed to consumer has been refunded during the month of March-2016 vide SC&AR No.186/R203. He further submitted that bill was raised to consumer on acrtual reading recorded by meter. Consumer contested that his meter was recording abnormal reading

95 which has no parity with his past and future consumption. Deptt failed to get his meter examined from Lab and misplaced meter in due course. He stressed upon the Forum to either get meter checked from Lab or charge abnormal consumption on the basis of past or future consumption whichever suits to Nigam. SDO submitted that since meter has been lost so he is unable to get meter checked from Lab. After going through the records and hearing the parties, the Forum observed that Licensee failed to get meter checked from Lab and same was misplaced by official of Licensee, this is deficiency on the part of Licensee and therefore Forum decides to dispose of the complaint with the direction that bill of consumer from to be overhauled on the basis of consumption recorded from to The Forum further directs that departmental disciplinary action may be taken against official incharge responsible for keeping the meter in safe custody. Case is closed and parties to bear their own cost. As required under Haryana State Electricity Regulatory Commission (Guidelines for establishment of Forum for Redressal of Grievances of consumers, Electricity Ombudsman and Consumer Advocacy) Regulations-2016, the implementation of this decision may be intimated to this office within 30 days from the date of its receipt. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 15 th March (K.D. Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

96 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2043/2018 Date of Institution: 16/01/2018 Date of Hearing: Date of Order: Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: 1 K.D.Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman 2 Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of complaint of Sh. Umesh Kumar, HN 2M/40-2 nd Floor,2-M Block, NH-2 Faridabad regarding change of billing cycle. V/s.. Complainant/Petitioner 1 XEN (OP) Divn. DHBVN, NIT Faridabad 2 SDO (OP) Sub Divn.No.2, DHBVN, Faridabad Appearance:- For Complainant: Present.Respondents For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer CGRF Hisar. 2 Representative of Respondent SDO

97 ORDER Sh. Umesh Kumar, HN 2M/40-2 nd Floor,2-M Block, NH-2, Faridabad has got an electricity connection bearing account No under (OP) Sub-Division No.2, DHBVN, Faridabad hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. The complainant has filed the present complaint stating therein that his meter is installed in 2M block whereas his billing cycling in allotted in Dabuwa colony as a result he is raised bill on average basis and no bill is issued to him. He requested the Forum to get his complaint redressed. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Faridabad for hearing of the case. The proceedings of the case held at Faridabad on The complainant and representative of SDO were present. The complainant argued the case in line with written statement. SDO submitted reply vide memo No dated stating that consumer account was put inadvertantly in 7U Group binder instead of 1U in the system. Now matter has been taken up with RAPDRP system and assured the Forum that binder will be changed by next billing cycle and consumer shall be delivered correct bill. Consumer agreed the submission by SDO. After going through the records and hearing the parties, the Forum decides to dispose of the complaint with the direction that binder of complainant may be changed and he shall be delivered the bill after taking meter reading and allotting correct binder before next billing cycle. Case is closed and parties to bear their own cost. As required under Haryana State Electricity Regulatory Commission (Guidelines for establishment of Forum for Redressal of Grievances of consumers, Electricity Ombudsman and Consumer Advocacy) Regulations-2016, the implementation of this decision may be intimated to this office within 30 days from the date of its receipt. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 15 th March (K.D. Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

98 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2064/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: Date of Order: Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: 1 K.D.Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman 2 Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of complaint of Sh. Surya Lok, HN 1031A, Sector-29 HB Colony Faridabad regarding correction of bill V/s.. Complainant/Petitioner 1 XEN (OP) Divn. DHBVN, Old Faridabad 2 SDO (OP) Sub Divn West, DHBVN, Faridabad Appearance:- For Complainant: Present.Respondents For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer CGRF Hisar. 2 Respondent SDO

99 ORDER Sh. Surya Lok, HN 1031A, Sector-29 HB Colony, Faridabad has got an electricity connection bearing account No under (OP) Sub-Division West, DHBVN, Faridabad hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. The complainant has filed the present complaint stating therein that an electricity bill in Feb.2018 has been raised to him by showing very high consumptions. Consumption recorded by meter from to i.e. in 331 days is 2479 units whereas he has been billed for 1775 units in 44 days from to which is 5 times of previous bill cycle. He requested the Forum to get his complaint redressed. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Faridabad for hearing of the case. The proceedings of the case held at Faridabad on The complainant and SDO were present. The complainant argued the case in line with written statement. SDO submitted reply vide memo No. 221 dated stating that meter of consumer was checked on and found meter working OK and reading as 5942 KWH. Consumer was billed from to as per consumption recorded by meter in 73 days. There is no provisional billing and bill has been raised on actual consumption basis. Bill is correct and rightly payable by consumer. He requested the forum to file the complaint. Complainant argued the case and stated that his consumption can not be so high in two months whereas reading recorded prior to that is normal. After going through the records and hearing the parties, the Forum finds that there is no abnormality in the bill raised to consumer. However for the satisfaction of consumer the Forum directs that meter of complainant may be got checked from Lab. Case is closed and parties to bear their own cost. As required under Haryana State Electricity Regulatory Commission (Guidelines for establishment of Forum for Redressal of Grievances of consumers, Electricity Ombudsman and Consumer Advocacy) Regulations-2016, the implementation of this decision may be intimated to this office within 30 days from the date of its receipt. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 15 th March (K.D. Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

100 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2065/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: Date of Order: Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: 1 K.D.Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman 2 Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of complaint of Smt. Suman Devi w/o Sukhpal Singh, G-1-238, Indira Enclave, Sanjay Colony Faridabad regarding wrong billing V/s.. Complainant/Petitioner 1 XEN (OP) Divn. DHBVN, Old Faridabad 2 SDO (OP) Sub Divn No.4, DHBVN, Faridabad Appearance:- For Complainant: None.Respondents For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer CGRF Hisar. 2 Respondent SDO

101 ORDER Smt. Suman Devi w/o Sukhpal Singh, G-1-238, Indira Enclave, Sanjay Colony, Faridabad has got an electricity connection bearing account No under (OP) Sub- Division 4, DHBVN, Faridabad hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. The complainant has filed the present complaint stating therein that no representative of DHBVN visited premises for meter reading and bills are issued on assumed reading basis. Units charged for Sept. and Nov. are very low whereas she has been charged excessively for Jan Se requested the Forum to get her complaint redressed. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Faridabad for hearing of the case. The proceedings of the case held at Faridabad on The complainant was not present and SDO was present. SDO submitted reply vide memo No dated stating that consumer has been billed upto units in the month of Nov.2017 and upto units in Jan On representation of consumer, record was checked and it was found that consumer has been billed for very low units in Sept and Nov. and for excessive high units in Jan Bill of consumer has been revised from to by giving benefit of slab and tariff. Now bill is absolutely correct and requested the forum to file complaint. He also placed on record the copy of revised bill. After going through the records and hearing the parties, the Forum finds that there is no merit in the complaint as bill of consumer has already been revised on Complaint is disposed off with no direction. Case is closed and parties to bear their own cost. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 15 th March (K.D. Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

102 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2066/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: Date of Order: Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: 1 K.D.Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman 2 Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of complaint of Smt. Sarabjeet Kaur Khurana, 44/First Floor, Surya Nagar Phase-II, Sector-91 Faridabad regarding non issue of bill V/s 1 XEN (OP) Divn. DHBVN, Greater Faridabad 2 SDO (OP) Sub Divn No., DHBVN, Tilpat.. Complainant/Petitioner Appearance:- For Complainant: Present.Respondents For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer CGRF Hisar. 2 Respondent SDO

103 ORDER Smt. Sarabjeet Kaur Khurana, 44/First Floor, Surya Nagar Phase-II, Sector-91, Faridabad has got an electricity connection bearing account No under (OP) Sub- Division, DHBVN, Tilpat hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. The complainant has filed the present complaint stating therein that her connection was released in July-2017 and first bill has not been generated till now ever after passage of 7 months. No reading has been taken since then. She requested the Forum to get her complaint redressed. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Faridabad for hearing of the case. The proceedings of the case held at Faridabad on The complainant and SDO were present. SDO submitted reply vide memo No dated stating that account of complainant was updated on system in the month f Jan First bill of this consumer has been generated and sent to consumer through MRBD agency and on mobile number. He further assured that now onwards the complainant will get the bill in time. Copy of bill was also handed over to consumer during hearing. After going through the records and hearing the parties, the Forum finds that complaint has already been redressed and decided to dispose of the complainant in view reply submitted by SDO. Case is closed and parties to bear their own cost. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 15 th March (K.D. Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

104 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2068/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: Date of Order: Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: 1 K.D.Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman 2 Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of complaint of Sh Rama Kant, D-112 Om Enclave Part-II, near Agawanpur village Faridabad regarding wrong billing V/s 1 XEN (OP) Divn. DHBVN, Greater Faridabad 2 SDO (OP) Sub Divn No., DHBVN, Tilpat.. Complainant/Petitioner Appearance:- For Complainant: None.Respondents For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer CGRF Hisar. 2 Respondent SDO

105 ORDER Sh Rama Kant, D-112 Om Enclave Part-II, near Agawanpur village, Faridabad has got an electricity connection bearing account No under (OP) Sub-Division, DHBVN, Tilpat hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. The complainant has filed the present complaint stating therein that he got bill on provisional basis during Feb.2018 and got it rectified on at local SDO office and paid the same at cash counter but till date his payment has not been updated and online system is showing outstanding amount against him. He requested the Forum to get her complaint redressed. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Faridabad for hearing of the case. The proceedings of the case held at Faridabad on The complainant was not present and SDO was present. SDO submitted reply vide memo No dated stating that billing of consumer has been corrected and same has been updated on the system. After going through the records and hearing the parties, the Forum finds that complaint has already been redressed and decided to dispose of the complainant in view reply submitted by SDO. Case is closed and parties to bear their own cost. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 15 th March (K.D. Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

106 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2067/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: Date of Order: Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: 1 K.D.Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman 2 Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of complaint of Sh Chander Shekar Joshi, c/o Ram Chander Joshi C-124 SD Vihar, near Fauji Hardware, Surajkund Faridabad regarding wrong billing V/s.. Complainant/Petitioner 1 XEN (OP) Divn. DHBVN, Old Faridabad 2 SDO (OP) Sub Divn Mathura Road DHBVN, Tilpat Appearance:- For Complainant: None.Respondents For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer CGRF Hisar. 2 Respondent SDO

107 ORDER Sh Chander Shekar Joshi, c/o Ram Chander Joshi C-124 SD Vihar, near Fauji Hardware, Surajkund Faridabad has got an electricity connection bearing account No under (OP) Sub-Division, DHBVN, Mathura Road, Faridabad hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. The complainant has filed the present complaint stating therein that his bill has been raised by miscalculation. He requested the Forum to get his complaint redressed. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Faridabad for hearing of the case. The proceedings of the case held at Faridabad on The complainant was not present and SDO was present. SDO submitted reply vide memo No dated stating that billing of consumer is correct as per consumption recorded in meter during bimonthly cycle. There is no abnormality in the bill raised to consumer and he requested to file the complaint. Neither the consumer nor his representative was present to explain his case. After going through the records and hearing the parties, the Forum finds no merit in the complaint and bills are raised correctly and no abnormality in the bill and decided to dispose of the complainant in view reply submitted by SDO. Case is closed and parties to bear their own cost. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 15 th March (K.D. Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

108 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2069/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: Date of Order: Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: 1 K.D.Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman 2 Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of complaint of M/S HM Web House Pvt Ltd B-102 Sanjay Colony behind Sector-23 NIT Faridabad regarding non availability of power supply V/s 1 XEN (OP) Divn. DHBVN, NIT Faridabad 2 SDO (OP) Sub Divn No.3 DHBVN, Faridabad.. Complainant/Petitioner Appearance:- For Complainant: Present.Respondents For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer CGRF Hisar. 2 Representative of Respondent SDO

109 ORDER M/S HM Web House Pvt Ltd B-102 Sanjay Colony behind Sector-23 NIT Faridabad has got an electricity connection bearing account No under (OP) Sub-Division, DHBVN No.3, Faridabad hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. The complainant has filed the present complaint stating therein that they are one of the eminent manufacturer and exported of web off set printing machine and they have to supply the material to the export units in a time bound manner and since last 2-3 months there is shortage of power supply in the area and supply is being switched off from 9.00 am to 5.00 pm without any reason and without informing to them. They requested to redress the complaint. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Faridabad for hearing of the case. The proceedings of the case held at Faridabad on The complainant and representative of SDO were present. SDO submitted reply vide memo No dated stating that connection of consumer is running through 11 KV Sanjay colony feeder as per CM announcement RMC road has to be constructed along Majesar Gochi drain form Thermal power house to Sohna Ropad. So for the shifting of HT/LT line the work has been started during the month of Jan.2018 and to do the shifting work 11 KV Sanjay colony feeder had to be shut down. He further submitted that on the request orf consumer his office did not take any permit for 7-8 days in the month of Feb, As the work is monitored by Govt level and there is pressure of management to comp-laete the work and they have to take permit on line. Consumer as present who stated that line is switched off without any planning and after switching of the supply material is shifted at site and even work is carried out which require no interference with supply. He requested the form to direct the Licensee to supply at least 4 days in a week and during other days supply be switched off only after arranging the proper man and material at site for minimum duration that too after informing the consumer. After going through the records and hearing the parties, the Forum finds merits in the contention of consumer and he cannot be compelled to remain without supply for days together and License should plan work in advance and supply and switched off only men and material are shifted at site and they are ready to carry out the work. The forum therefore decides and directs the Licensee that there should not be more than 3 days permit in a week and that too after proper planning and shifting of men and material at site. Case is closed and parties to bear their own cost.

110 File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 15 th March (K.D. Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

111 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2070/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: Date of Order: Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: 1 K.D.Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman 2 Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of complaint of Sh Jitender Sehwag, AQ-06/FF BPTP Park Land, Sector-81 Faridabad regarding refund of security V/s 1 XEN (OP) Divn. DHBVN, Old Faridabad 2 SDO (OP) Sub Divn No.4 DHBVN, Faridabad.. Complainant/Petitioner Appearance:- For Complainant: Present.Respondents For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer CGRF Hisar. 2 Respondent SDO

112 ORDER M Sh Jitender Sehwag, AQ-06/FF BPTP Park Land, Sector-81Faridabad has got an electricity connection bearing account No under (OP) Sub-Division, DHBVN No.4, Faridabad hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. The complainant has filed the present complaint stating therein that he was having a electricity connection with DHBVN till 8/2017. He got same disconnected and paid all the dues to DHBVN. He further submitted that an amount of Rs deposited by him in the form of security is lying with DHBVN and he has lost the security receipt and DHBVN is not refunding the amount on one pretext or other. He requested to redress the complaint. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Faridabad for hearing of the case. The proceedings of the case held at Faridabad on The complainant and SDO were present. Consumer argued the case in line with written submission and requested to refund him security deposited with DHBVN. SDO was present who submitted that he did not receive the complaint so reply could not be prepared by him. On enquiry it was found that complaint was forwarded to SDO S/D No.3 inadvertently by Nodal officer. Consumer argued that he is a govt. Employee and cannot visit so frequently after taking leave. SDO stated that in the absence of original receipt of security the complainant shall submit the Affidavit regarding non claiming of ACD afterwards. Complainant contested and stated that as per direction of government no person can be asked for Affidavit. After going through the records and hearing the parties, the Forum decides that complainant will submit an undertaking alongwith his self attested ID giving the facts ad undertake regarding non claiming of ACD is original receipt is traced later on. SDO will check his record (Service connection register, A&A form and security register) and refund the security to the consumer through cheque/dd /RTGS within a one months time if the respondent fail to refund the security within stipulated period, the security may be refunded alongwith applicable interest from the date of order to the date of payment. Case is closed and parties to bear their own cost. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 15 th March (K.D. Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

113 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2074/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: Date of Order: Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: 1 K.D.Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman 2 Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member wrong billing In the matter of complaint of Sh Gopal Krishan C-35/11 DLF Faridabad regarding V/s 1 XEN (OP) Divn. DHBVN, Old Faridabad 2 SDO (OP) Sub Divn East DHBVN, Faridabad.. Complainant/Petitioner Appearance:- For Complainant: Present.Respondents For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer CGRF Hisar. 2 Respondent SDO

114 ORDER Sh Gopal Krishan C-35/11 DLF Faridabad has got an electricity connection bearing account No under (OP) Sub-Division, DHBVN East, Faridabad hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. The complainant has filed the present complaint stating therein that his connection was disconnected during 1/2017 due to defaulting amount. He has to pay Rs at that time but due to heart problem he could not make the payment. His meter has been removed during Jan.2017 but till date bills are raised to him on average basis. He requested to redress the complaint. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Faridabad for hearing of the case. The proceedings of the case held at Faridabad on The complainant and SDO were present. Consumer argued the case in line with written submission and requested to correct his bill. SDO submitted reply vide No. 935 dated stating therein that meter of complainant was removed in the month of 1/2017 and PDCO was not entered in the consumer account resulting in raising bill on average basis. He further submitted that now PDCO has been entered in the system. Bill has been corrected and net amount payable by consumer is Rs He placed on record a copy of duplicate bill after refund the amount. Copy of reply alongwith duplicate bill was handed over to consumer and he was satisfied with the reply submitted by SDO. After going through the records and hearing the parties, the Forum finds that complainant has already been redressed and he is satisfied with the resolution so forum decides to dispose of the complaint with no direction. Case is closed and parties to bear their own cost. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 15 th March (K.D. Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

115 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2075/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: Date of Order: Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: 1 K.D.Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman 2 Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of complaint of Smt Babita w/o Udai Kumar, 279/Second floor, Ashoka Enclave, Sector-35 Faridabad regarding wrong billing V/s.. Complainant/Petitioner 1 XEN (OP) Divn. DHBVN, Old Faridabad 2 SDO (OP) Sub Divn Mathura Road DHBVN, Faridabad Appearance:- For Complainant: None.Respondents For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer CGRF Hisar. 2 Respondent SDO

116 ORDER Smt Babita w/o Udai Kumar, 279/Second floor, Ashoka Enclave, Sector-35 Faridabad has got an electricity connection bearing account No under (OP) Sub-Division, DHBVN MR, Faridabad hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. The complainant has filed the present complaint stating therein that DHBVN is generating electricity bill without any meter reading or physical verification in an arbitrary manner. Her bill is raised without reading and resulting in excess bill. She requested to redress the complaint. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Faridabad for hearing of the case. The proceedings of the case held at Faridabad on The complainant was not present and SDO was present. SDO submitted reply vide No dated stating therein that billing of consumer has been corrected and consumer is satisfied now. He also placed on record the copy of satisfaction report given by consumer. After going through the records and hearing the parties, the Forum finds that complainant has already been redressed and she is satisfied with the resolution so forum decides to dispose of the complaint with no direction. Case is closed and parties to bear their own cost. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 15 th March (K.D. Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

117 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2080/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: Date of Order: Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: 1 K.D.Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman 2 Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of complaint of Smt Om Ratti Yadva, HN 8 Gali No.13 D-II, Sanjay Colony Sector-23 Faridabad regarding wrong billing V/s 1 XEN (OP) Divn. DHBVN, Old Faridabad 2 SDO (OP) Sub Divn No.3 DHBVN, Faridabad.. Complainant/Petitioner Appearance:- For Complainant: Representative.Respondents For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer CGRF Hisar. 2 Representative of Respondent SDO

118 ORDER Smt Om Ratti Yadva, HN 8 Gali No.13 D-II, Sanjay Colony Sector-23 Faridabad has got an electricity connection bearing account No under (OP) Sub-Division, DHBVN No.3, Faridabad hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. The complainant has filed the present complaint stating therein that her meter is running in OK condition. Present meter reading is 760 units whereas she was billed on provisional basis from June-16 to Jan.18. She further submitted that bill to her sent on MMC basis whereas her consumption is very low. She requested to Forum that since her meter is running OK so MMC is not applicable in her case so excess amount charged of Rs may be refunded to her. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Faridabad for hearing of the case. The proceedings of the case held at Faridabad on The complainant and SDO were present. SDO submitted reply vide No dated stating therein that consumer has been billed correctly as per consumption recorded/mmc basis. She is charged as per instructions of HERC and Licensee and there is no dispute on the bill raised t consumer and she is rightly billed on MMC basis. Consumer argued that she should not be raised billed on MMC basis as her consumptikon is very low. SDO advised the complainant to get the load reduced if she feels that MMC is more than consumption. After going through the records and hearing the parties, the Forum finds no merit in the complaint as consumer is rightly chargeable either on MMC or units consumer whichever is higher as per existing HERC regulations. Forum decides to dispose of the complaint without any direction. Case is closed and parties to bear their own cost. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 15 th March (K.D. Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

119 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2080/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: Date of Order: Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: 1 K.D.Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman 2 Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of complaint of Smt Om Ratti Yadva, HN 8 Gali No.13 D-II, Sanjay Colony Sector-23 Faridabad regarding wrong billing V/s 1 XEN (OP) Divn. DHBVN, Old Faridabad 2 SDO (OP) Sub Divn No.3 DHBVN, Faridabad.. Complainant/Petitioner Appearance:- For Complainant: Representative.Respondents For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer CGRF Hisar. 2 Representative of Respondent SDO

120 ORDER Smt Om Ratti Yadva, HN 8 Gali No.13 D-II, Sanjay Colony Sector-23 Faridabad has got an electricity connection bearing account No under (OP) Sub-Division, DHBVN No.3, Faridabad hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. The complainant has filed the present complaint stating therein that her meter is running in OK condition. Present meter reading is 760 units whereas she was billed on provisional basis from June-16 to Jan.18. She further submitted that bill to her sent on MMC basis whereas her consumption is very low. She requested to Forum that since her meter is running OK so MMC is not applicable in her case so excess amount charged of Rs may be refunded to her. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Faridabad for hearing of the case. The proceedings of the case held at Faridabad on The complainant and SDO were present. SDO submitted reply vide No dated stating therein that consumer has been billed correctly as per consumption recorded/mmc basis. She is charged as per instructions of HERC and Licensee and there is no dispute on the bill raised t consumer and she is rightly billed on MMC basis. Consumer argued that she should not be raised billed on MMC basis as her consumption is very low. SDO advised the complainant to get the load reduced if she feels that MMC is more than consumption. After going through the records and hearing the parties, the Forum finds no merit in the complaint as consumer is rightly chargeable either on MMC or units consumer whichever is higher as per existing HERC regulations. Forum decides to dispose of the complaint without any direction. Case is closed and parties to bear their own cost. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 15 th March (K.D. Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

121 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2082/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: Date of Order: Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: 1 K.D.Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman 2 Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member regarding wrong billing In the matter of complaint of Smt Sushila, E-70/3 Pull Pehladpur New Delhi V/s 1 XEN (OP) Divn. DHBVN, Gr. Faridabad 2 SDO (OP) Sub Divn DHBVN, Tilpat.. Complainant/Petitioner Appearance:- For Complainant: Representative.Respondents For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer CGRF Hisar. 2 Respondent SDO

122 ORDER Smt Sushila, E-70/3 Pull Pehladpur New Delhi has got an electricity connection bearing account No under (OP) Sub-Division, DHBVN Tilpat hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. The complainant has filed the present complaint stating therein that she has been charged incorrectly for surcharge against her account. She further stated that she was issued a wrong bill during 12/2016 and made a complaint and her bill was corrected but surcharge levied on wrong bill was not refunded to her. She requested to redress complaint. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Faridabad for hearing of the case. The proceedings of the case held at Faridabad on The representative of complainant and SDO were present. SDO submitted reply vide No dated stating therein that consumer got wrong elecy bill during 12/16. Consumer approached S/D office and bill was corrected in same month and as such no surcharge was levied against consumer as bill was corrected. Consumer did not pay the amount since 12/16 till date and surcharged levied against her for non payment of bill is rightly chargeable and requested the Forum to file complaint. Complainant argued the case and stated that in the month of 8/18 the bill raised to her shows a surcharge of Rs out of total outstanding amount of Rs which is not possible in one year of non payment. She requested the Forum to get the detail verified from SDO. SDO submitted supplementary reply on stating therein that wrong bill to the consumer was issued on with due date as On representation of the complainant bill was corrected and due date was extended to Since the bill was corrected in the same month and due date was extended so possibility of levy surcharge on incorrect amount is zero. He also submitted that consumer is defaulter and not making the payment since 2013 and surcharge levy on the bill is correct. He requested the Forum to file the complaint. After going through the records and hearing the parties, the Forum finds no merit in the complaint of consumer as his bill was corrected in the same month and due date for payment was extended so there is no levy of surcharge on the incorrect amount. Forum also observed that consumer is not making payment since 2013 and has not come to Forum with clean hands

123 and therefore decides to dispose of complaint with no direction. Case is closed and parties to bear their own cost. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 15 th March (K.D. Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

124 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2094/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: Date of Order: Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: 1 K.D.Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman 2 Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of complaint of Sh Satish Garg, 174/3 Friends Colony, Parvesh Marg, Railway Road Faridabad regarding wrong charging of reading V/s 1 XEN (OP) Divn. DHBVN, Old Faridabad 2 SDO (OP) Sub Divn (W) DHBVN, Faridabad.. Complainant/Petitioner Appearance:- For Complainant: Present.Respondents For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer CGRF Hisar. 2 Respondent SDO

125 ORDER Sh Satish Garg, 174/3 Friends Colony, Parvesh Marg, Railway Road Faridabad has got an electricity connection bearing account No under (OP) Sub-Division, DHBVN West, Faridabad hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. The complainant has filed the present complaint stating therein that meter at his premises is installed outside. On MR reported that his meter has become dead stop. After information by MR, he raised a complaint with DHBVN on His meter was replaced and sent to Lab for checking. During checking, his meter seals were found OK and meter was reported to be slow. On being asked regarding the slowness of meter, it was replied that they can not provide the date of slowness. He was charged Rs after 3 months and threaten to disconnect supply on non payment. He further submitted that since seals provided on meter are OK and there is no tampering in meter so he cannot be held responsible. He further submitted that as per sales manual he should be charged for 6 months but excess amount has been charged from him. He requested to redress complaint. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Faridabad for hearing of the case. The proceedings of the case held at Faridabad on The complainant and SDO were present. SDO submitted reply vide No. 222 dated stating therein that elecy meter of consumer was sent to Lab on Meter was got tested in Lab and report was submitted vide No.1696 dated As per report accuracy of meter was found slow by %. On the lab report an amount of rs has been charged to consumer for a period of one year and amount charged t consumer is correct as per instructions and notice has been served to consumer. Consumer was present who argued the case in line with written submission and also placed on record a copy of instruction 6.7 and 4.15 of Licensee where the adjustment to be carried out in consumer account shall not excess 6 months. SDO contested the argument of consumer and stated that instructions put by consumer on record relates to 2013 and HERC vide Reg. issued during 2016 has withdrawn the time limitation. After going through the records and hearing the parties, the Forum finds no merit in the complaint of consumer and decides to dispose of complaint with the direction that bill raised to consumer may be accepted in two monthly installments without levy of surcharge on balance amount. Case is closed and parties to bear their own cost. As required under Haryana State Electricity Regulatory Commission (Guidelines for establishment of Forum for Redressal of Grievances of consumers, Electricity Ombudsman and

126 Consumer Advocacy) Regulations-2016, the implementation of this decision may be intimated to this office within 30 days from the date of its receipt. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 15 th March (K.D. Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

127 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2076/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: Date of Order: Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: 1. K D Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman 2 Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of complaint of Sh. Arvind Bhargava, H.N. 2923, Sector-46, near Amity Global School Gurgaon regarding wrong billing. V/s.. Complainant/Petitioner 1 Xen (OP) Division, DHBVN, Gurgaon 2 SDO (OP) South City S/Divn. DHBVN, Gurgaon.Respondents Appearance:- For Complainant: Present For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer/CGRF, DHBVN, Hisar 2 Representative of respondent SDO

128 ORDER Sh. Arvind Bhargava, HN 2923, Sector-46, near Amity Global School Gurgaon got an electricity connection bearing account No under SDO (OP) South City S/D DHBVN, Gurgaon, hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. The complainant has filed the present complaint stating therein that. Bill for the period of 12/11/2017 to 13/1/2018 has been raised for consumed unit of Correct rate has not been charged to him. He requested the forum to redress his complaint. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Gurugram for hearing of the case. Proceedings were held on The complainant and representative of respondent SDO were present. SDO submitted reply vide memo No.2230 dated stating that consumer that bill to the consumer has been raised as per instructions of the Nigam. The slab rate charged to consumer is correct. Consumer was present who stated that bill issued on 25/1/2018 has been raised showing the billed unit as where as units in his meter on is He requested the forum to get the meter checked and raised the bill as per actual consumption and slab rate. After going through the record available in the file and hearing the parties, the Forum decides to dispose off the complaint with the direction that meter of complainant may be checked today and bill may be raised accordingly. Case is closed. No cost on either side. As required under Haryana State Electricity Regulatory Commission (Guidelines for establishment of Forum for Redressal of Grievances of consumers, Electricity Ombudsman and Consumer Advocacy) Regulations-2016, the implementation of this decision may be intimated to this office within 30 days from the date of its receipt. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 27 th March, (K.D. Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

129 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2077/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: Date of Order: Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: 1. K D Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman 2 Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member regarding wrong billing In the matter of complaint of Smt. Archna Gupta, D-1994, Palam Vihar, Gurgaon. V/s.. Complainant/Petitioner 1 Xen (OP) Division, DHBVN, Gurgaon 2 SDO (OP) Maruti S/Divn. DHBVN, Gurgaon.Respondents Appearance:- For Complainant: None For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer/CGRF, DHBVN, Hisar 2 None for respondent SDO

130 ORDER Smt. Archna Gupta, D-1994, Palam Vihar,Gurgaon got an electricity connection bearing account No under SDO (OP) Maruti S/D DHBVN, Gurgaon, hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. The complainant has filed the present complaint stating therein that a wrong bill has been raised to her amounting to Rs.14308/ these charged are viewed in every bill since last 1 and half year or so. She requested the forum to redress her complaint. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Gurugram for hearing of the case. Proceedings were held on Neither complainant nor representatives of respondent SDO were present. However, SDO submitted reply vide memo No dated stating that bill of consumer has been rectified vide SC&AR No. 482/1-R for Rs and no complaint of complainant is pending. After going through the record available in the file and hearing the parties, the Forum decides to dispose off the complaint with no direction as grievances of the complainant has been redressed Case is closed. No cost on either side. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 27 th March, (K.D. Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

131 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2083/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: Date of Order: Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: 1. K D Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman 2 Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of complaint of Sh. Sushil Kumar Aggarwal, H-1102, Park View City-1, Sohna Road, Gurgaon regarding wrong billing. V/s.. Complainant/Petitioner 1 Xen (OP) Division, DHBVN, Sohna 2 SDO (OP) Sohna Road S/Divn. DHBVN, Gurgaon.Respondents Appearance:- For Complainant: None For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer/CGRF, DHBVN, Hisar 2 Representative of respondent SDO

132 ORDER Sh. Sushil Kumar Aggarwal, H-1102, Park View City-1, Sohna Road, Gurgaon got an electricity connection bearing account No under SDO (OP) Sohna Road S/D DHBVN, Gurgaon, hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. The complainant has filed the present complaint stating therein that incorrect reading have been recorded by the meter reader in the bill. He has requested the forum to redress his complaint. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Gurugram for hearing of the case. The proceedings were held on The complainant was not present but representative of respondent SDO was present. SDO submitted reply vide memo No.nill dated nill stating that incorrect bill was raised to the consumer due to premises locked. Now bill has been correct and complainant has given his satisfaction report through mail. After going through the record available in the file and hearing the parties, the Forum decides to dispose off the complaint as grievances of the consumer have been redressed. Case is closed. No cost on either side. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 27 th March, (K.D. Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

133 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2084/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: Date of Order: Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: 1. K D Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman 2 Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member wrong billing In the matter of complaint of Sh. Dinesh Kumar 1206/1, 12 Floor, Gurgaon regarding... Complainant/Petitioner V/s 1 Xen (OP) Division, DHBVN, Gurgaon 2 SDO (OP) South City S/Divn. DHBVN, Gurgaon.Respondents Appearance:- For Complainant: None For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer/CGRF, DHBVN, Hisar 2 Representative of respondent SDO

134 ORDER Sh. Dinesh Kumar 1206/1, 12 Floor,, Gurgaon got an electricity connection bearing account No under SDO (OP) South City S/D DHBVN, jurisdiction to hear the complaint. Gurgaon, hence this Forum has The complainant has filed the present complaint stating therein that is meter was replace and final has been shown as instead of He requested forum to redress his complaint. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Gurugram for hearing of the case. Proceeding were held on The complainant was not present but representative of respondent SDO was present. SDO submitted reply vide memo No dated stating that bill of consumer has been correct vide SC&AR No. 135/R/21 and refund of Rs has been given to the consumer. Consumer submitted satisfaction report through mail. After going through the record available in the file and hearing the parties, the Forum decides to dispose off the complaint as complaint of complainant has been redressed. Case is closed. No cost on either side. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 27 th March, (K.D. Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

135 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2095/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: Date of Order: Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: 1. K D Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman 2 Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member regarding wrong billing In the matter of complaint of Sh. Anil Kumar Gupta, 19/970, Lodhi Colony New Delhi. V/s 1 Xen (OP) Division, DHBVN, Gurgaon 2 SDO (OP) DLF S/Divn. DHBVN, Gurgaon.. Complainant/Petitioner.Respondents Appearance:- For Complainant: Present For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer/CGRF, DHBVN, Hisar 2 None from respondent SDO

136 ORDER Sh. Anil Kumar Gupta, 19/970, Lodhi Colony New Delhi got an electricity connection bearing account No under SDO (OP) DLF S/D DHBVN, Gurgaon, hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. The complainant has filed the present complaint stating therein that average bill has been raised for the period 17/10/2017 to 18/12/2018 for usage of 2844 unit. He further submitted that average charged is on higher side as unit consumed during month of December 2015 & 2016 are very low. He requested the forum to charged unit on corresponding month basis. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Gurugram for hearing of the case. Proceedings were held on The complainant was present but representative of respondent SDO was not present. No reply was submitted by the respondent SDO. Nodal officer was present, who was a mere spectator during the hearing. No arguments were advanced by Nodal officer. After going through the record available in the file and hearing the parties, the Forum decides to dispose off the complaint with the direction that average the consumer may be charged on corresponding month basis. He may be charged for average unit billed during December Case is closed. No cost on either side. As required under Haryana State Electricity Regulatory Commission (Guidelines for establishment of Forum for Redressal of Grievances of consumers, Electricity Ombudsman and Consumer Advocacy) Regulations-2016, the implementation of this decision may be intimated to this office within 30 days from the date of its receipt. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 27 th March, (K.D. Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

137 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2103/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: Date of Order: Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: 1. K D Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman 2 Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member regarding metering In the matter of complaint of M/S Airtel Ltd, Building No.10-B DLF City Gurgaon. V/s 1 Xen (OP) Division, DHBVN, Manesar 2 SDO (OP) DLF S/Divn. DHBVN, Manesar.. Complainant/Petitioner.Respondents Appearance:- For Complainant: None For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer/CGRF, DHBVN, Hisar 2 None for respondent SDO

138 ORDER M/S Airtel Ltd, Building No.10-B DLF City Gurgaon got an electricity connection bearing account No. AFDS-006 under SDO (OP) S/D DHBVN, Manesar, hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. The complainant has filed the present complaint stating therein that. Wrong bill amounting to Rs has been raised to them for the month of feb He further submitted that wrong arrear has been shown in the bill where as they have made earlier payments. He has requested the forum to redress his complaint. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Gurugram for hearing of the case. Proceedings were held on Neither the complainant nor representatives of respondent SDO were present. However, SDO submitted reply vide memo No dated stating that wrong bill was issued to the consumer during the month of 10/2017, now the bill has been corrected vide SC&AR No 1249/93/R Amounting to Rs After going through the record available in the file and hearing the parties, the Forum decides to dispose off the complaint with no direction as complaint of the complainant has already been redressed. Case is closed. No cost on either side. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 27 th March, (K.D. Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

139 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2033/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing & Dated of Order Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: 1 K.D.Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman 2 Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of Sh. Jai Dev s/o Sh. Ram Partap V&PO Dhansu, Hisar regarding 24 hours supply in Dhanis. V/s.. Complainant/Petitioner Appearance:- For Complainant: For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer CGRF Hisar 2 Respondent SDO XEN (OP) Divn.No.1 DHBVN, Hisar SDO (OP) City S/D DHBVN, Satrod Present.Respondents

140 ORDER Sh. Jai Dev s/o Sh. Ram Partap V&PO Dhansu, Hisar has got an electricity connection bearing account No under (OP) City Sub Divn. Hisar hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. The complainant has filed present complaint stating therein that from the last 3 months supply in their residences has been reduced to 8 hours since last 3 months. They are resident of Govt. colony area under SDO/City Hisar. Their area falls within municipality limit still they are being fed from AP feeder. The complainant requested for redressal his grievances. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Hisar for hearing of the case. The proceedings held at Hisar on The complainant was not present and SDO(OP) City who submitted written reply filed vide No 2117 dated stating therein that existing RDS feeder has been converted into AP feeder and accordingly the supply is provided for 8 hours. He further submitted that consumer has to deposit cost for shifting their Dhanis from AP feeder to RDS feeder. On being enquiry, he could not reply regarding the area falling within municipality limit and instructions of Licensee on the issue. He requested for another date to submit his detailed reply. Request granted. Now to come on next date i.e Proceedings were held at Hisar on The complainant and respondent SDO were present. SDO stated that the area of the complainant was checked personally and area falls in the extended municipality limit in fields. There are agriculture as well as domestic consumers in the area. Consumers were being fed from 11 KV Vinod Nagar Urban feeder. During March2017 a plan was made to bifurcate the urban area from tubewell area an estimate amounting to Rs lacs was got sanctioned. The area of city was bifurcated as per the instructions of Licensee. Consumer argued that supply to their premises were being fed from urban feeder since last years and shifting of supply from urban feeder at this stage is injustice to them. He also submitted that they are charged MC tax & thus entitle for urban supply. SDO submitted that consumer can be fed from urban area if they comply with the instructions of the licensee and deposit the amount involved in shifting the connection to urban feeder. He stressed upon that the MC tax is collected by Licensee on behalf of municipality if any facility is to be provided regarding extension of supply it should be deposited either by municipality or by the consumer. Supply can be shifted only in compliance of instruction of Licensee. After going through the record available on file and hearing the parties the Forum agrees with the contention of respondent SDO and therefore decides to dispose of the complaint with no direction. Case is closed. Party to bear their own cost. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 9 th March (K.D.Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

141 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2035/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing & Date of Order Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: 1 K.D.Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman 2 Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of Sh. Rai Sahab s/o Shankar Lal, VPO Talwandi Rana, Hisar regarding issue of bill after removal of meter. V/s.. Complainant/Petitioner Appearance:- For Complainant: For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer CGRF Hisar 2 Respondent SDO XEN (OP) Divn.No.1 DHBVN, Hisar SDO (OP) City S/D DHBVN, Satrod Present.Respondents

142 ORDER Sh. Rai Sahab s/o Shankar Lal, VPO Talwandi Rana, Hisar has got an electricity connection bearing account No. RT under (OP) City Sub Divn. Hisar hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. The complainant has filed present complaint stating therein that his meter was removed 3 to 4 years back and supply was disconnected permanently still bills are issued to him. The complainant requested for redressal his grievances. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Hisar for hearing of the case. The proceedings held at Hisar on The complainant and respondent SDO were present and no written reply was submitted by SDO(OP). He further submitted that he needs some time to trace out the old record of the Sub Divn and requested for another date Request granted. Now to come on next date i.e Proceedings were held at Hisar on Consumer and respondent SDO were present. SDO submitted reply vide memo NO.2481 dated stating therein that bill of said consumer has been corrected and a sum of Rs has been adjusted vide SC&AR No.619/96. He also put up on record copy of sundry and revised duplicate bill on record. Consumer was agreed with the reply submitted by the respondent SDO. After going through the record and hearing the parties, the Forum observed that the complaint of complainant has been redressed by Licensee and therefore decides to dispose of the complaint with no direction. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 9 th March (K.D.Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

143 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2050/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing & Date of Order Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: 1 K.D.Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman 2 Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member billing In the matter of Sh. Nafe Singh s/o Tara Chand, VPO Data, Hansi, Hisar regarding wrong V/s.. Complainant/Petitioner Appearance:- For Complainant: For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer CGRF Hisar 2 Respondent SDO XEN (OP) Divn. DHBVN, Hansi SDO (OP) S/U S/D DHBVN, Hansi Present.Respondents

144 ORDER Sh. Nafe Singh s/o Tara Chand, VPO Data, Hansi,, Hisar has got an electricity connection bearing account No. DT1D1000-A under (OP) S/U Sub Divn. Hansi hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. The complainant has filed present complaint stating therein that during the month of Nov.2017 a bil of Rs has been raised to him. The consumption recorded by meter for two months as He further stated that reading of his meter has jumped or meter reading has not recorded the reading properly. He requested to get his meter checked and redress his grievance. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Hisar for hearing of the case. The proceedings held at Hisar on The complainant was present and representative of respondent SDO was also present. SDO requested vide his memo No.215 dated for giving next date of hearing on the plea that he has joined recently and needs some time to investigate the matter. Consumer was present who argued that surcharge is being levied on his exaggerated bill and requested to settle the issue at the earliest. He also requested the Forum to get meter checking from Lab. Representative of SDO contended that if consumer is ready to deposit the testing fee, his meter will be got tested from the Lab. The forum asked the SDO to get the meter checked from the Lab and put up lab report on next date of hearing. Case is adjourned. Now to come on next date i.e Proceedings were held at Hisar on Consumer and respondent SDO were present. SDO submitted reply vide memo N.444/45 dated stating therein that the meter of the consumer has been checked by the M&T Lab Hisar and found working within permissible limit. No abnormality was observed while checking the meter in the Lab. He submitted that the higher reading recorded by meter is the result of accumulation of reading by meter reading agency. He also submitted on record the M&T report. Consumer was present who was satisfied with the checking of meter. However he further stated that bill was raised suddenly to the tune of Rs and he is not in a position to deposit bill in one lot. He requested the Forum to allow him to deposit the bill in installments with levy of surcharge. After going through the record and hearing the parties, the Forum observed that it is a case of accumulation of reading by meter reading agency and decides to dispose of the complaint with the direction that bill may be accepted in three equal bimonthly installments and no surcharge be levied from the date bill is raised to the consumer till the payment of the bills. If consumer defaults in payment of installments surcharge may be levied accordingly.

145 As required under Haryana State Electricity Regulatory Commission (Guidelines for establishment of Forum for Redressal of Grievances of consumers, Electricity Ombudsman and Consumer Advocacy) Regulations-2016, the implementation of this decision may be intimated to this office within 30 days from the date of its receipt. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 9 th March (K.D.Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

146 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2053/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing & Date of Order Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: 1 K.D.Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman 2 Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of Sh. Parveen Kumar s/o Subhash Chander, Umra Gate, Ganga Bagh near Mahendra Music Centre Hansi, Hisar regarding wrong billing V/s.. Complainant/Petitioner Appearance:- For Complainant: For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer CGRF Hisar 2 Respondent SDO XEN (OP) Divn. DHBVN, Hansi SDO (OP) S/D DHBVN, Hansi Present.Respondents

147 ORDER Sh. Parveen Kumar s/o Subhash Chander, Umra Gate, Ganga Bagh near Mahendra Music Centre Hansi Hisar has got an electricity connection bearing account No under (OP) Sub Divn. Hansi hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. The complainant has filed present complaint stating therein that he received a very high bill of Rs His meter was installed in 6/2017 and in 4 months bill of Rs has been raised which is not justified. He requested for redressal of grievance. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Hisar for hearing of the case. The proceedings held at Hisar on The complainant was present and representative of respondent SDO was also present. No written reply was filed by SDO stating that he received the complaint 2 days back and could not get time to submit the reply. The consumer was present wh stated that there is some problem in the meter as he called a pvt Electrician alongwith various size of capacitors and tried to maintain power factor by installing capacitor of difference size but he could maintain the power factor even with 6 KVA capacitor for load of 10.0 kw. The representative of SDO was asked by this Forum to depute a technical officer to understand the problem of the complainant and submit report alongwith written reply on next date of hearing. Meter may also be got checked from the lab during the period. Case is adjourned. Now to come on next date i.e Proceedings were held at Hisar on Consumer and respondent SDO were present. SDO submitted reply vide memo No. 329 dated stating therein that the consumer made a complaint regarding working of meter to his office and meter was checked by JE incharge of area. During checking no capacitor was found installed at consumer premises. Meter was also sent to Lab on the request of consumer during 12/2017 and working of meter was found within permissible limits. He further submitted that the site of the consumer was again checked by the JE incharge and found that consumer has installed a capacitor bank at his premises and now the recording of KVAH and KWH are comparable hence the bill charged as per reading recorded by the meter. He also placed on record the copy of Lab report, consumption data and statement of the JE incharge who visited the site. Consumer was present who stressed that there is a huge difference in KWH and KVAH reading recorded by the meter and this cannot be without the abnormality in the meter. He requested the Forum to get complaint redressed in his favour.

148 After going through the record and hearing the parties, the Forum observed that there is no reason to interfere with the billing dispose of consumer as meter working was found with permissible limit by Lab and consumer has not installed capacitor initially. The Forum decides to dispose of complaint with no merit. Case is closed and parties to bear their own cost. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 9 th March (K.D.Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

149 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2078/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing Date of Order Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: 1 K.D.Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman 2 Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of Sh. Satta Ram s/o Sh. Sakru Ram, r/o Surewala (Uklana) Hisar regarding wrong billing and reconnection V/s.. Complainant/Petitioner Appearance:- For Complainant: XEN (OP) Divn. DHBVN, Tohana SDO (OP) S/D DHBVN, Uklana.Respondents Representative For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer CGRF Hisar 2 Respondent SDO

150 ORDER Sh. Satta Ram s/o Sh. Sakru Ram, r/o Surewala (Uklana) Hisar has got an electricity connection bearing account No. SR1D-0789 under (OP) Sub Divn. Uklana hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. The complainant has filed present complaint stating therein that his connection was disconnected on defaulting amount one year back but still bill is raised to him. He requested the Forum to accept the amount in installments and reconnect the connection. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Hisar for hearing of the case. The proceedings held at Hisar on The representative of complainant and respondent SDO were present. The reply was filed by respondent SDO vide No.2188 dated stating therein that the connection of complinant was disconnected on due to defaulting amount outstanding against the consumer. PDCO was entered during 2/2017 and connection was shifted to disconnected ledger after levying surcharge of 6 months and an amount of Rs is outstanding as defaulting amount against the complainant. The bill of disconnected amount are sent to complainant for payment and no additional amount is added in his account. He placed on record the ledger copy of complainant from Feb,.2011 to date and copy of PDCO. Representative of consumer was present. She stated that defaulting amount may be accepted from him in instilments and supply may be restored. She further submitted that she may be allowed to installments of Rs alongwith current bill. After going through the record and hearing the parties, the Forum observed that complainant is not making the payment of defaulting amount since 2010 and even today she is not ready to make the payment. Therefore the Forum decides to dispose of the complaint with no direction as there is no merit in the complaint. Case is closed. Both the parties to bear their own cost. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 9 th March (K.D.Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

151 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2079/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing Dated of Order Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: 1 K.D.Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman 2 Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member connection In the matter of Sh. Amrish Kumar r/o Ward No.4, Barwala, Hisar regarding shifting of V/s.. Complainant/Petitioner Appearance:- For Complainant: For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer CGRF Hisar 2 Respondent SDO XEN (OP) Divn.No.1 DHBVN, Hisar SDO (OP) City S/D DHBVN, Hisar Present.Respondents

152 ORDER Sh. Amrish Kumar r/o Ward No.4, Barwala, Hisar has got an electricity connection bearing account No under (OP) City Sub Divn. Hisar hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. The complainant has filed present complaint stating therein that he has a domestic connection at his farm house since more than 10 years on domestic feeder. He further submitted that he is paying the bills without any delay since then but authorities have shifted his domestic connection on AP feeder after segregation of feeder. This is against law and equity of DHBVN segregation feeder from domestic to AP. The complainant requested for redressal his grievances. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Hisar for hearing of the case. The proceedings held at Hisar on The complainant and respondent SDO were present who did not submit written reply and submitted that due to late receipt of complaint he could not prepare the written reply. SDO stated that the area of the complainant was checked and area falls outside the municipality limit in fields. There are agriculture as well as domestic consumers in the area. Earlier consumers were being fed from 11 KV mixed feeder having domestic as well as agriculture connections. As per instructions of Licensee, the area of city was bifurcated. Consumer argued that supply to their premises were being fed from urban feeder since last years and shifting of supply from urban feeder at this stage is injustice to them. Consumer placed on record the copy of instructions of licensee regarding service connection. He submitted that as per instructions of licensee no cost is to be charged from him upto 150 meters so his connection be shifted on domestic feeder without levy of any charge. SDO submitted that the instructions supplied by complainant relates to new connection and service connection charges are to be deposited by applicant for release of connection upto 150 meters, the connection may be on AP feeder, domestic feeder or urban feeder so the plea of the complainant is not tenable. He requested to file the complaint. After going through the record available on file and hearing the parties the Forum agrees with the contention of respondent SDO and therefore decides to dispose of the complaint with no direction. Case is closed. Party to bear their own cost. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 9 th March (K.D.Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

153 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2081/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing Dated of Order Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: 1 K.D.Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman 2 Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of Sh. Anil Kumar House No Sector 16/17, Hisar regarding wrong billing V/s.. Complainant/Petitioner Appearance:- For Complainant: For the Respondent XEN (OP) Divn.No.1 DHBVN, Hisar SDO (OP) C/Line S/D DHBVN, Hisar Present 1 Nodal Officer CGRF Hisar 2 Representative of Respondent SDO.Respondents

154 ORDER Sh. Anil Kumar r/o 1798 Sector 16/17, Hisar has got an electricity connection bearing account No under (OP) C/L Sub Divn. Hisar hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. The complainant has filed present complaint stating therein that he has been charged excess bill through sundry whereas he is paying the bills regularly. The complainant requested for redressal his grievances. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Hisar for hearing of the case. The proceedings held at Hisar on The complainant and respondent SDO were present who submitted written reply vide No. Spl1 dated stating therein that an amount of Rs were charged wrongly as difference of ACD and service connection charges instead of Rs Now the difference of Rs again been charged to the consumer. Representative of consumer was present and detail of charging was explained to him. He was satisfied with the charged levied in his bill and submitted and submitted a satisfaction report. After going through the record available on file and hearing the parties the Forum decides to dispose of the complaint as complaint has already been 4redressed and consumer is satisfied with the reply by respondent SDO. Case is closed. Party to bear their own cost. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 9 th March (K.D.Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

155 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar Telephone No (website: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2056/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: Date of Order: Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: 1 K.D.Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman 2 Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of complaint of Sh. Ram Diya s/o Sh. Om Dutt, Bhiwani Road Aashram Basti, Bhagwati Wali Gali Jind regarding wrong billing V/s.. Complainant/Petitioner XEN (OP) DHBVN, Jind SDO (OP) D/U II DHBVN, Jind.Respondents Appearance:- For Complainant: None For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer CGRF Hisar 2 Representative of Respondent SDO

156 ORDER Sh. Ram Diya s/o Sh. Om Dutt, Bhiwani Road Aashram Basti, Bhagwati Wali Gali Jind has got an electricity connection bearing account No under (OP) S/U II Jind has made a complaint and hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint The complainant has filed the present complaint stating therein that the reading recorded by the meter on was 3981 units whereas he has been billed for a consumption of 625 units which is wrong. He requested to get his complaint redressed. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Hisar for hearing of the case. The proceedings held at Hisar on The complainant was not present and representative of respondent SDO was present. The respondent SDO filed written reply vide no dated stating therein that the bill was raised provisionally due to non recording of reading by the MRBD firm and now same has been got verified and revised bill has been issued to complainant as per actual reading recorded by the meter. After going through the record on file and hearing the party, the Forum finds that complaint of complainant has been redressed and therefore to dispose of the complaint in view of written reply of SDO.. The case is closed. Both the parties to bear their own cost. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 9 th March, (K.D.Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

157 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2099/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: Date of Order : Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: K.D Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of complaint of Sh. Yoginder Kumar s/o Umed Singh, Village Khyra, PO Khatod (Mohindergarh) regarding change of name V/s.. Complainant/Petitioner XEN (OP) DHBVN Mohindergarh SDO (OP)City S/Divn DHBVN Mohindergarh Appearance:-.Respondents For Complainant: Present For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer CGRF DHBVN Hisar. 2 Respondent SDO

158 ORDER Sh. Yoginder Kumar s/o Umed Singh, Village Khyra, PO Khatod (Mohindergarh) has got an electricity connection bearing account No. CP under SDO, City Sub Divn. DHBVN Mohindergarh hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. He filed the present complaint stating that a connection is existing in the name of his father. During the partition tubewell connection has come in his share whereas connection of house has gone to share of his brother. He has paid outstanding amount against this tubewell connection. He also submitted that partition of their land has been done by Revenue authorities and requested to change the name of tubewell connection to his name. He requested the Forum to redress his grievance. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Narnaul for hearing of the case. The proceedings held at Narnaul on The complainant and respondent SDO were present. The consumer argued his case in line with written submission. The SDO submitted written reply vide memo No dated stating therein that tubewell is existing in the name of father of complainant and if complainant wants to get connection transferred in his name he should submit documentary evidence for trhe same. Consumer argued that his father as well as his brother has given no objection certificate on Affidavit. He also submitted that Licensee is corresponding with him regarding payment of defaulting amount since last more than 2-3 years but connection is not changed in his name. He also placed the copy of Affidavit and correspondence made by Licensee. SDO submitted that one more domestic connection is existing in the name of Umed Singh who is defaulter of licensee. Consumer contested that domestic connection is used by his brother and he has also filed court case regarding that connection. After considering facts of the case and hearing the parties, the Forum decides to dispose of complaint with the direction that an Indemnity Bond regarding defaulting amount of domestic connection and regarding any dispute for tubewell connection may be obtained from the complainant and change of name may be effected thereafter. Case is closed. No cost on either side. As required under Haryana State Electricity Regulatory Commission (Guidelines for establishment of Forum for Redressal of Grievances of consumers, Electricity Ombudsman and Consumer Advocacy) Regulations-2016, the implementation of this decision may be intimated to this office within 30 days from the date of its receipt. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 20 th March, (K.D.Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

159 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2085/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: Date of Order : Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: K.D Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of complaint of Sh. Hari Singh Yadav s/o Panna Lal, Village Mandalana, Tehsil Narnaul (Mohindergarh) regarding release of tubewell connection V/s.. Complainant/Petitioner XEN (OP) DHBVN Narnaul SDO (OP) S/U S/Divn DHBVN Narnaul Appearance:-.Respondents For Complainant: Present For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer CGRF DHBVN Hisar. 2 Respondent SDO

160 ORDER Sh. Hari Singh Yadav s/o Panna Lal, Village Mandalana, Tehsil Narnaul (Mohindergarh) has applied for an electricity connection for tubewell under SDO, OP S/U Sub Divn. DHBVN Narnaul hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. He filed the present complaint stating that he applied for tubewell connection on by depositing a sum of Rs No connection has been released till date even after passing of 21 years. He did not receive any demand notice nor any intimation regarding cancellation of application. He submitted that no Nigam is saying that application has been cancelled just to avoid delay in releasing of connections. He requested the Forum to redress his grievance. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Narnaul for hearing of the case. The proceedings held at Narnaul on The complainant and respondent SDO were present. The consumer argued his case in line with written submission. The SDO submitted that due to late receipt of complaint he could not prepare written reply. However he stated that application of complainant stands cancelled on He also put up the service connection register showing cancellation of application duly signed by the then SDO. Consumer stressed that amount deposited by him should be refunded alongwith interest if Nigam is not in a position to release the connection or connection should be released immediately. After considering facts of the case and hearing the parties, the Forum finds that the there is no merit in the complaint hence Forum decides to dispose of complaint with the direction that security of the complainant may be refunded alongwith interest payable on saving account by Bank. Case is closed. No cost on either side. As required under Haryana State Electricity Regulatory Commission (Guidelines for establishment of Forum for Redressal of Grievances of consumers, Electricity Ombudsman and Consumer Advocacy) Regulations-2016, the implementation of this decision may be intimated to this office within 30 days from the date of its receipt. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 20 th March, (K.D.Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

161 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2087/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: Date of Order : Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: K.D Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of complaint of Sh. Hanuman s/o Daya Ram, Village Balaycha, PO Budian (Mohindergarh) regarding shifting of LT line V/s.. Complainant/Petitioner XEN (OP) DHBVN Mohindergarh SDO (OP) S/U S/Divn DHBVN Mohindergarh Appearance:-.Respondents For Complainant: Present For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer CGRF DHBVN Hisar. 2 Respondent SDO

162 ORDER Sh. Hanuman s/o Daya Ram, Village Balaycha, PO Budian (Mohindergarh) has made a complaint related to SDO, OP S/U Sub Divn. DHBVN Mohindergarh hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. He filed the present complaint stating that LT line feeding to his tubewell is passing through his plot. The height of the wire is low and also it is passing near to his house. He requested the Forum to redress his grievance. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Narnaul for hearing of the case. The proceedings held at Narnaul on The complainant and respondent SDO were present. The consumer argued his case in line with written submission. The SDO submitted written reply vide memo No. 854 dated stating therein that line of the consumer can be shifted only when amount is deposited by consumer for shifting of line. He also submitted that house of consumer is situated in field area and it is not possible to shift the line without depositing of estimated amount. He also placed on record the copy of estimate amounting to Rs Consumer requested the Forum that he is not in a position to make payment of the estimated amount. He also requested the forum to help him and amount of estimate may be got rechecked to which SDO agreed. After considering facts of the case and hearing the parties, the Forum decides that site of complainant may be visited personally by respondent SDO and estimated amount may be recalculated accordingly. It is also decided that credit of dismantled material may be given while preparing estimate. The work of shifting the line may be completed within one month after deposit of amount by complainant. Case is closed. No cost on either side. As required under Haryana State Electricity Regulatory Commission (Guidelines for establishment of Forum for Redressal of Grievances of consumers, Electricity Ombudsman and Consumer Advocacy) Regulations-2016, the implementation of this decision may be intimated to this office within 30 days from the date of its receipt. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 20 th March, (K.D.Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

163 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2088/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: Date of Order : Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: K.D Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of complaint of Sarpanch Gram Panchayat, Village Kanwi, Tehsil Narnaul (Mohindergarh) regarding release of connections for water supply and providing additional T/F in the village V/s.. Complainant/Petitioner XEN (OP) DHBVN Narnaul SDO (OP) S/Divn DHBVN Nangal Choudhary Appearance:-.Respondents For Complainant: None For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer CGRF DHBVN Hisar. 2 Respondent SDO

164 ORDER Sarpanch Gram Panchayat, Village Kanwi, Tehsil Narnaul (Mohindergarh) under SDO, OP Sub Divn. DHBVN, Nangal Choudhary hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. He filed the present complaint stating that they have applied for release of connection for water supply in the village but the same has not been released. He also submitted that due to over loading of T/F there is problem of supply in village. He requested the Forum to redress his grievance. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Narnaul for hearing of the case. The proceedings held at Narnaul on The complainant was not present but respondent SDO was present. The SDO submitted that written reply could not be prepared due to late receipt of application. However, he submitted that connection of water supply shall be released within a week and additional T/F shall be provided within one month After considering facts of the case and hearing the parties, the Forum decides to dispose of complaint with the direction to release the connection and provide additional transformer as assured by SDO. Case is closed. No cost on either side. As required under Haryana State Electricity Regulatory Commission (Guidelines for establishment of Forum for Redressal of Grievances of consumers, Electricity Ombudsman and Consumer Advocacy) Regulations-2016, the implementation of this decision may be intimated to this office within 30 days from the date of its receipt. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 20 th March, (K.D.Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

165 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2090/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: Date of Order : Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: K.D Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of complaint of Sh. Chiranji Lal s/o Neki Ram, VPO Daulat Jat Tehsil Narnaul (Mohindergarh) regarding replacement of worn out ACSR V/s.. Complainant/Petitioner XEN (OP) DHBVN Narnaul SDO (OP) S/U S/Divn DHBVN Ateli Appearance:-.Respondents For Complainant: Present For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer CGRF DHBVN Hisar. 2 Respondent SDO

166 ORDER Sh. Chiranji Lal s/o Neki Ram, VPO Daulat Jat Tehsil Narnaul (Mohindergarh) has got an electricity connection bearing account No. DU-51/0544 under SDO, OP Sub Divn. DHBVN Ateli hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. He filed the present complaint stating that connection to their tubewell was released 45 years back. Due to old age the conductor and poles have got damaged resulting in frequent break down of supply. He requested the Forum to redress his grievance. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Narnaul for hearing of the case. The proceedings held at Narnaul on The complainant and respondent SDO were present. The consumer argued his case in line with written submission. The SDO submitted written reply vide memo No dated 00 dated stating therein that estimate for replacement of old ACSR and damaged PCC pole has been sanctioned by competent authority and work will be completed after harvesting of crop. He assured the forum that work will be completed by He also placed on record the copy of sanctioned estimate. Consumer agreed to submission of SDO. After considering facts of the case and hearing the parties, the Forum decides to dispose of complaint with the direction that worn out ACSR and damaged pole may be replaced by as assured by SDO. Case is closed. No cost on either side. As required under Haryana State Electricity Regulatory Commission (Guidelines for establishment of Forum for Redressal of Grievances of consumers, Electricity Ombudsman and Consumer Advocacy) Regulations-2016, the implementation of this decision may be intimated to this office within 30 days from the date of its receipt. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 20 th March, (K.D.Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

167 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2089/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: Date of Order : Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: K.D Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of complaint of Sh. Balbir Singh Sardar Atta Chakki, Pull Bazar Narnaul regarding correction of bill V/s.. Complainant/Petitioner XEN (OP) DHBVN Narnaul SDO (OP) City S/Divn DHBVN Narnaul Appearance:-.Respondents For Complainant: Present For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer CGRF DHBVN Hisar. 2 Respondent SDO

168 ORDER Sh. Balbir Singh Sardar Atta Chakki, Pull Bazar Narnaul has got an electricity connection bearing account No under SDO, OP City Sub Divn. DHBVN Narnaul hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. He filed the present complaint stating that his meter was replaced in Jan.2018 without any reason. Earlier meter was purchased by him and was working OK. At the time of replacement, Licensee has assured that no rent will be charged but now meter is being charged through Bill. He requested the Forum to redress his grievance. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Narnaul for hearing of the case. The proceedings held at Narnaul on The complainant and respondent SDO were present. The consumer argued his case in line with written submission. He also placed on record the copy of the bill of purchase of earlier meter alongwith elecy bill showing when no rent was charged and when rent was charged. The SDO submitted no written reply but stated that reply could not be prepared due to late receipt of complaint. However he submitted that meter was replaced due to change in tariff and KVAH meter was installed by Nigam at the consumer s premises. Old meter was working OK. After considering facts of the case and hearing the parties, the Forum decides to dispose of complaint with the direction that no meter rent should be charged from the consumer as earlier meter was purchased by consumer and was working OK at the time of replacement. Case is closed. No cost on either side. As required under Haryana State Electricity Regulatory Commission (Guidelines for establishment of Forum for Redressal of Grievances of consumers, Electricity Ombudsman and Consumer Advocacy) Regulations-2016, the implementation of this decision may be intimated to this office within 30 days from the date of its receipt. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 20 th March, (K.D.Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

169 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2022/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: & Date of Order Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: K.D.Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman Manu Bishnoi, Independent Membr In the complaint of M/S Indus Tower Ltd Site at Mameri Ahir, (SCO No. 137 FF, Sector -13 UE Karnal) Rewari regarding wrong billing V/s XEN (OP) Divn. DHBVN, Dharuhera SDO (OP) Sub Divn., DHBVN, Pali Gothra.. Complainant/Petitioner Appearance:- For Complainant: Present.Respondents For the Respondent Nodal Officer CGRF Hisar. Representative of SDO

170 ORDER M/S Indus Tower Ltd Site at Mameri Ahir, (SCO No. 137 FF, Sector -13 UE Karnal) Rewari has got an electricity connection bearing Account No. BD-21/56 under (OP) Sub-Division, DHBVN, Pali Gothra, has filed a complaint through Sh. MS Chauhan. Hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. The complainant has filed the present complaint stating therein that account of their connection was overhauled for the period of 3/15 to 6/16 on the basis of checking report of M&P dated He further submitted that meter at their connection was installed on and found working OK by M&P during 3/2013, 3/2014 and 3/2015. He further submitted that there was fault in CT chamber of meter installed at their premises and supply remained disconnected during this period and same was restored on so the charging on the basis of average is unjustified. He further submitted that as per HERC regulation issued vide Reg No.29/2014, a notice is required to be issue to them before charging any amount. The said amount has been charged to them without any notice. He prayed the Forum to issue the bill as per actual recorded consumption from and refund actual provision billing done during the period. He submitted on record th copy of M&P reports, copy of ledger from 3/12 to 9/17. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Rewari for hearing of the case. The proceedings of the case held at Rewari on The complainant and representative of respondent SDO were present. The complainant argued his case in line with written submissions. The SDO filed written statement vide No.5154 dated SDO submitted only the calculation of the amount charged to consumer and no parawise reply is submitted by him. Since no detailed reply was submitted by SDO and complainant also requested for next date, the hearing deferred to next date. Now to come on Proceedings were held at Narnaul on Complainant submitted the replication to reply submitted by defendant Nigam on During hearing the representative of complainant stated that pointwise reply has not been supplied by respondent SDO. However, as per reply submitted the account to be overhauled is for Rs whereas actual provisional billing was made amounting to Rs He also submitted that correct tariff has not been levied for relevant period of 3/12 to 4/16 as per recorded consumption. Representative of SDO was present who could not explain anything nor he produced pointwise reply as asked during earlier hearing. Representative was simply a spectator and could not brought out anything in the defense of Licensee. Nodal Officer also could not explain anything.

171 After considering facts of the case and hearing the parties, the Forum observed that Licensee is not defending the case properly and forum has no option but to decide the case in the absence of defence of licensee. The forum further observed that LT CT meter was installed on as per M&P checking report vide MT 1 No.2051/21 dated Meter was working OK during the checking of M&P on However, it was found CT defective from which was set right during checking. Forum therefore decides that account of consumer may be overhauled as per actual consumption recorded by the meter from to-date after adjusting average and levy of penalty if any on account of slowness. The forum also decides that while recalculating the bill relevant tariff and multiplying factor may be made available accordingly.. Case is closed. No cost on either side. As required under Haryana State Electricity Regulatory Commission (Guidelines for establishment of Forum for Redressal of Grievances of consumers, Electricity Ombudsman and Consumer Advocacy) Regulations-2016, the implementation of this decision may be intimated to this office within 30 days from the date of its receipt. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 20 th March, (K.D.Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

172 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2086/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: Date of Order Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: K.D.Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member regarding wrong billing In the complaint of Sh. Shiv Kumar s/o Som Dutt, Pandiya Chowk, Bawal, Rewari V/s XEN (OP) Divn. DHBVN, Dharuera SDO (OP) DHBVN, Bawal.. Complainant/Petitioner Appearance:- For Complainant: None.Respondents For the Respondent Nodal Officer CGRF Hisar. Respondent SDO

173 ORDER Sh. Shiv Kumar s/o Som Dutt, Pandiya Chowk, Bawal, Rewari has got an electricity connection bearing account No. N42-CP1D0330 under SDO, OP Sub Divn. DHBVN Bawal hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. He filed the present complaint stating that he applied for change of meter on but meter was not replaced till Nov Even after replacement of meter no reading is recorded by MR and bill is still raised on average basis. He requested the Forum to redress his grievance. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Narnaul for hearing of the case. The proceedings held at Narnaul on The complainant was not present and respondent SDO were present who submitted reply vide memo No.2155 dated stating therein that consumer meter was defective form 10/16 to 12/17. During this period bill was raised to consumer on average basis on consumption recorded during same month of previous year. Consumer meter was replaced during 11/17 at IR 1, delay of meter was not intentional and meter could not be replaced due to shortage of meter in Store. Account of consumer will be overhauled as per new meter consumption as per Licensee instructions. He also placed on record MCO checking report dated and consumer ledger from Aug.2015 to Feb After considering facts of the case and hearing the parties, the Forum decides to dispose of complaint with the direction that bill of complainant may be overhauled on the basis of actual reading recorded by meter after replacement of old meter. Forum also decides to take action against meter reading agency for recording wrong billing. Case is closed. No cost on either side. As required under Haryana State Electricity Regulatory Commission (Guidelines for establishment of Forum for Redressal of Grievances of consumers, Electricity Ombudsman and Consumer Advocacy) Regulations-2016, the implementation of this decision may be intimated to this office within 30 days from the date of its receipt. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 20 th March, (K.D.Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

174 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2093/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: Date of Order: Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: 1. K D Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman 2 Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of complaint of Sh. Mander Singh s/o Bakhtawar Singh, Vill Pacca Sahian, Tehsil Kalanwali Sirsa, regarding release of tubewell connection V/s.. Complainant/Petitioner 1 Xen/Op. City Division, DHBVN, Dabwali 2 SDO (OP) DHBVN, Kalanwali.Respondents Appearance:- For Complainant: Present For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer/CGRF, DHBVN, Hisar 2 Representative of Respondent SDO

175 ORDER Sh. Mander Singh s/o Bakhtawar Singh, Vill Pacca Sahian, Tehsil Kalanwali Sirsa, has applied for tubewell connection under SDO/Op DHBVN, Kalanwali, Sirsa, hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. The complainant has filed the present complaint stating therein that he applied for tubewell connection and paid Rs on Now SDO has intimated that his connelction cannot be released and he may withdraw the amount deposited with Nigam. The complainant requested to redress his grievance. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Sirsa for hearing of the case. The proceedings were held at Sirsa on Consumer and representative of SDO were present. SDO submitted written reply vide memo No. Spl.1 dated stating therein that application of complainant bearing A&A No has not been cancelled so far. If the complainant deposits the balance amount and completes the formalities required for release of connection within 10 days, the connection shall be released accordingly. Consumer agreed to complete the formalities within next 10 days. After hearing both the parties and going through the record, the Forum decides to dispose of the complaint with the direction that connection of complainant be released as per seniority and instructions of licensee if he deposits balance amount and completes the formalities required for release of connection within next 10 days. Case is closed. No cost on either side. As required under Haryana State Electricity Regulatory Commission (Guidelines for establishment of Forum for Redressal of Grievances of consumers, Electricity Ombudsman and Consumer Advocacy) Regulations-2016, the implementation of this decision may be intimated to this office within 30 days from the date of its receipt. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 22 th March, (K.D. Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

176 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2100/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: Date of Order: Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: 1. K D Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman 2 Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of complaint of Sh. Rakesh Kumar s/o Sher Singh, Near Shiv Mandir Kirti Nagar, Begu Road, Sirsa, regarding wrong billing V/s.. Complainant/Petitioner 1 Xen/Op. City Division, DHBVN, Sirsa 2 SDO (OP) City DHBVN, Sirsa.Respondents Appearance:- For Complainant: Present For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer/CGRF, DHBVN, Hisar 2 Representative of Respondent SDO

177 ORDER Sh. Rakesh Kumar s/o Sher Singh, Near Shiv Mandir Kirti Nagar, Begu Road,Sirsa, has got an electricity connection bearing account No under SDO/Op, City DHBVN, Sirsa, Sirsa, hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. The complainant has filed the present complaint stating therein that a bill for the period to was issued to him without reading. He lodged a complaint with Nigam on and thereafter a bill of 8018 units was raised. The complainant requested to redress his grievance. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Sirsa for hearing of the case. The proceedings were held at Sirsa on Consumer and SDO were present. SDO submitted written reply vide memo No. 603 dated stating therein that meter of consumer was replaced on and referred to Lab. Meter found defective at the time of testing showing abnormal behavior. He further submitted that consumer bill will be rectified after entry of MCO in system. SDO placed on record M&T checking report dated , LL1 dated and consumption from to 3/2018. Consumer was present who stated that his meter was checked during 6/2008 by a private agency hired by Nigam at site and meter was reported to be running fast. He reported matter to Licensee but till date his meter is not replaced and now meter has become defective and giving abnormal consumption. He requested to get his complaint redressed. After hearing both the parties and going through the record, the Forum observed that 1. M&T lab report has been prepared in a very casual way. It has not been signed either by SDO or JE incharge of Lab. Also abnormality pointed out has been explained in Lab report. 2. Connected load of the consumer was found higher than sanctioned load. The forum therefore, decides to dispose of the complaint with the direction that account of consumer may be overhauled on the basis of load recorded at the time of checking and account may be overhauled thereafter keeping in view the consumption recorded by new meter. Case is closed. No cost on either side. As required under Haryana State Electricity Regulatory Commission (Guidelines for establishment of Forum for Redressal of Grievances of consumers, Electricity Ombudsman and Consumer Advocacy) Regulations-2016, the implementation of this decision may be intimated to this office within 30 days from the date of its receipt. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 22 th March, (K.D. Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

178 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2104/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: Date of Order: Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: 1. K D Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman 2 Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of complaint of Sh. Mohan Lal Sharma, near Shiv Mandir, Kirti Nagar Sirsa, regarding wrong billing V/s.. Complainant/Petitioner 1 Xen/Op. City Division, DHBVN, Sirsa 2 SDO (OP) City DHBVN, Sirsa.Respondents Appearance:- For Complainant: None For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer/CGRF, DHBVN, Hisar 2 Representative of Respondent SDO

179 ORDER Sh. Mohan Lal Sharma, near Shiv Mandir, Kirti Nagar Sirsa, has applied has got an electricity connection baring account No under SDO/Op City DHBVN, Sirsa, hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. The complainant has filed the present complaint stating therein that he is residing with his son at Delhi and in Sirsa his old meter and children are residing. Elecy Bill of his connection at Sirsa is issued by taking wrong reading since He further submitted that on a bill of reading 1094 units has been raised for 30 days. He requested Forum to get his bill on correct reading issued from to The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Sirsa for hearing of the case. The proceedings were held at Sirsa on Consumer and SDO were present. SDO submitted written reply vide memo No. 602 dated stating therein that consumer has lodged a complaint for checking of meter and same meter was referred to Lab. As per lab report meter working was found within permissible limit and reading recorded as Representative of SDO submitted that bill was raised on actual reading basis and there is no abnormality in recording reading and bill is correct. He requested to file the complaint. He also placed on record a copy of M&T lab report, consumption data of consumer from 5/16 to and site checking report of JE dated After hearing both the parties and going through the record, the Forum decides to dispose of the complaint with no direction as there is no merit in the complaint because variation in consumption is not abnormal. Case is closed. No cost on either side. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 22 th March, (K.D. Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

180 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2111/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: Date of Order: Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: 1 K.D.Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman 2 Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of complaint of Ch. Bansi Lal University, Bhiwani regarding wrong billing. V/s.. Complainant/Petitioner 1 Xen (OP) Division, DHBVN, Bhiwani 2 SDO (OP) S/U S/D-1DHBVN, Bhiwani Appearance:-.Respondents For Complainant: None For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer/CGRF, DHBVN, Hisar 2 Respondent SDO

181 ORDER Ch. Bansi Lal University, Bhiwani got an electricity connection bearing account No under SDO (OP) S/U-1 DHBVN Bhiwani, hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. The complainant has filed the present complaint stating therein that the burden of heavy amount of Rs has been levied on them which is not justified and wrong. The complainant requested to redress their complaint. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Bhiwani for hearing of the case. Proceedings of the case were held at Bhiwani on The consumer was not present but respondent SDO was present. The respondent SDO filed written reply vide No. 798 dated stating therein that the complainant has made complaint regarding waival of surcharge imposed on consumer account on account of dishonoured cheque. Complainant made the payment for the month of Dec.2017 for Rs through account payee cheque which was dishonored. Due to dishonour of cheque an amount of Rs as surcharge and Rs as penalty was imposed on the consumer. He further submitted that connection of consumer was released against deposit estimate amounting to Rs but complainant deposited an amount of Rs.4.0 lacs and hence balance amount of Rs was charged to the consumer. Consumer was informed through a notice on regarding payment of balance amount. He was informed and asked to deposit the amount many times thereafter. SDO submitted on record estimate No.DWD-65/ and notice dated and half margin pointed out regarding charging of amount. Neither complainant or his representative was present for pursuing the case. After going through the record on case file and hearing the parties, the Forum decides to dispose of the complaint as there is no merit in the complaint. Case is closed. Both the parties to bear their own costs. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 20 th April, (K.D.Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

182 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2112/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: Date of Order: Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: 1 K.D.Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman 2 Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of complaint of M/S Shiv Bhole Stone Crusher, Kheri Battar, Tehsil Ch. Dadri (Bhiwani ) regarding refund of service connection charges.. Complainant/Petitioner V/s 1 Xen (OP) Division, DHBVN, Ch Dadri 2 SDO (OP) DHBVN, Atela Kalan Appearance:-.Respondents For Complainant: Present For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer/CGRF, DHBVN, Hisar 2 Respondent SDO

183 ORDER M/S Shiv Bhole Stone Crusher, Kheri Battar, Tehsil Ch. Dadri (Bhiwani ) got an electricity connection bearing account No. MR HT-17 under SDO (OP) DHBVN Atela Kalan, hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. The complainant has filed the present complaint stating therein that a sum of Rs was deposited by him as service connection charges but connection was got released under self execution scheme. Supervision 1.5% were also deposited with the Nigam. The complainant requested to redress their complaint. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Bhiwani for hearing of the case. Proceedings of the case were held at Bhiwani on The representative of complainant & representative of respondent SDO were present. The respondent SDO filed written reply vide No. 52 dated stating therein that complainant applied for release of connection on with contract demand of 389 KVA. Complainant deposited an amount of Rs including service connection charges amounting to Rs Site of applicant was checked by the area incharge and an estimate amounting to Rs was sanctioned by competent authority. Demand notice was issued to consumer for deposit of estimated cost but the consumer preferred to release of connection by executing the work himself. Supervision charges was also deposited by the complainant. Service connection charges was charged as per SC No.D-26/2011 whereas consumer is demanding refund of service connection charges under SC No.D-42/2006 which is not correct. He further submitted that sales instructions 42/2006 did not allow the refund of service connection charges and made provisions regarding non charging of development charge from the applicant. He submitted that service connection was charged by applicant as per SC No.D- 26/2011 and cannot be refunded. Complainant stated that earlier also CGRF has allowed refund of service connection charges to 4-5 consumers in his area. He also submitted the copy of letter from SE/Commercial DHBVN Hisar dated and XEN cum Nodal Officer DHBVN Hisar letter dated in support of his claim. He further submitted that charging of service connection charges to him will be injustice and may be allowed refund of same. After going through the record on case file and hearing the parties, the Forum decides to dispose of the complaint and finds no merit in the complaint. The service connection charges are rightly chargeable from the consumer in view of Sales instructions 26/2011 and did not consider the earlier decision of CGRF as these are not applicable in the instant case. Case is closed. Both the parties to bear their own costs. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 20 th April, (K.D.Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

184 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2131/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: Date of Order: Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: 1 K.D.Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman 2 Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of complaint of Smt Raj Bala w/o Late Sh. Fateh Singh, Village Nakipur, Tehsil Loharu (Bhiwani ) regarding shifting of line... Complainant/Petitioner V/s 1 Xen (OP) S/U Division, DHBVN, Bhiwani 2 SDO (OP) DHBVN, Digawan Jattan Appearance:-.Respondents For Complainant: Present For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer/CGRF, DHBVN, Hisar 2 Respondent SDO

185 ORDER Smt Raj Bala w/o Late Sh. Fateh Singh, Village Nakpur, Tehsil Loharu (Bhiwani ) has applied for shifting of line under SDO (OP) DHBVN, Digawan Jattan, hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. The complainant has filed the present complaint stating therein that 11 KV line is passing over her house. Due to this line there is danger to the life of complainant. She further stated that SDO is demanding Rs as estimate for shifting of line. The complainant requested to redress her complaint. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Bhiwani for hearing of the case. Proceedings of the case were held at Bhiwani on The representative of complainant & respondent SDO were present. The respondent SDO filed written reply vide No dated stating therein that complainant made a request to his office regarding shifting of 11 KV line passing through her house. Site was checked by Sh. Pawan Kumar JE and found that house has been erected by the complainant under the 11 KV line. He prepared a deposit estimate amounting to Rs but complainant has not deposited so the line cannot be shifted without the deposit of estimated cost. He further submitted that complainant made a complaint to Hon ble CM Haryana on CM Window portal. Complaint was investigated and same has been filed on by competent authority i.e. CM office. Complainant was present who argued the case in line with written submission and stated that line was erected in her field against her will and being a poor person she is not in a position to deposit the estimated cost. After going through the record on case file and hearing the parties, the Forum decides to dispose of the complaint as there is no merit in the complaint. Line cannot be shifted without deposit of amount as house was erected by her under 11 KV line in violation of Elecy Act. Also the complaint has already been investigated by competent authority and same stands filed. Case is closed. Both the parties to bear their own costs. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 20 th April, (K.D.Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

186 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2121/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: Date of Order: Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: 1 K.D.Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman 2 Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of complaint of Sh Pardeep Pawaria, HN G-1-240, Indra Enclave, Sector 21-D, Faridabad regarding wrong charging V/s 1 XEN (OP) Divn. DHBVN, Old Faridabad 2 SDO (OP) Sub Divn-4, DHBVN, Faridabad.. Complainant/Petitioner Appearance:- For Complainant: Present.Respondents For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer CGRF Hisar. 2 Respondent SDO

187 ORDER Sh Pardeep Pawaria, H.N. G-1-240, Indra Enclave, Sector 21-D,Faridabad has got an electricity connection bearing account No under (OP) Sub-Division, DHBVN-4 Faridabad hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. The complainant has filed the present complaint stating therein that he is not receiving electricity bill at his resident also meter reading are not taken by DHBVN he is being charge on average bases without taking reading. He requested to redress complaint. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Faridabad for hearing of the case. The proceedings of the case held at Faridabad on The complainant and SDO were present. SDO submitted reply vide No dated stating therein that bill of consumer has been corrected after the verifying the reading from site. He further submitted that do to wrong allocation of group. The bill are no receive by the complaint. Now binder group has been change and consumer will receive bill regularly henceforth. The complainant was present who was satisfied with the reply and correction of bill. After going through the records and hearing the parties, the Forum decides to dispose of complaint with the direction that it must be ensured that bill are regularly to the consumer in future. Case is closed and parties to bear their own cost. As required under Haryana State Electricity Regulatory Commission (Guidelines for establishment of Forum for Redressal of Grievances of consumers, Electricity Ombudsman and Consumer Advocacy) Regulations-2016, the implementation of this decision may be intimated to this office within 30 days from the date of its receipt. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 13 th April (K.D. Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

188 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2123/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: Date of Order: Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: 1 K.D.Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman 2 Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of complaint of Sh M.D Haseeb, HN C-40, Gali No.1, Shiv Vihar Part-II Basantpur, Ismailpur, Faridabad regarding wrong billing V/s 1 XEN (OP) Divn. DHBVN, Gr. Faridabad 2 SDO (OP) Tilpath, DHBVN, Faridabad.. Complainant/Petitioner Appearance:- For Complainant: Present.Respondents For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer CGRF Hisar. 2 Respondent SDO

189 ORDER Sh M.D Haseeb, HN C-40, Gali No.1, Shiv Vihar Part-II, Basantpur, Ismailpur, Faridabad has got an electricity connection bearing account No under (OP) Sub-Division, DHBVN Faridabad hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. The complainant has filed the present complaint stating therein that his meter was replaced on and his is getting incorrect bill thereafter. He requested the forum to get bill correct as per meter reading. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Faridabad for hearing of the case. The proceedings of the case held at Faridabad on The complainant and SDO were present. SDO submitted reply vide No dated stating therein that wrong bill was issue to the consumer by wrong entry of MCO in the system. Now the bill has been corrected and consumer has to pay Rs.2173 instead of Rs complainant agreed to make the payment of corrected bill. After going through the records and hearing the parties, the Forum decides to dispose of complaint as complaint of consumer has already been redressed. Case is closed and parties to bear their own cost. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 13 th April (K.D. Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

190 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2116/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: Date of Order: Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: 1. K D Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman 2 Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of complaint of Sh. Ravinder Nath Sharma, , Ravindra Niwash, Sector-17, Gurgaon regarding wrong billing. V/s.. Complainant/Petitioner 1 Xen (OP) S/U Division, DHBVN, Gurgaon 2 SDO (OP) Maruti S/Divn. DHBVN, Gurgaon.Respondents Appearance:- For Complainant: Present For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer/CGRF, DHBVN, Hisar 2 Representative of respondent SDO

191 ORDER Sh. Ravinder Nath Sharma, , Ravindra Niwash, Sector-17, Gurgaon got an electricity connection bearing account No under SDO (OP) Maruti S/D DHBVN, Gurgaon, hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. The complainant has filed the present complaint stating therein that he has a domestic connection in Palam Vihar but he is not getting electricity bills since long. As a result he has to visit S/Divn. every time and make request to generate the bill. He has requested the forum to redress his complaint. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Gurugram for hearing of the case. Proceedings were held on The complainant and representatives of respondent SDO were present. However, SDO submitted reply vide memo No dated stating that at the time of shifting of system under RAPDRP wrong binder has been allocated to the complainant. As a result bill could not prepared and delivered to complainant. Now the binder has been updated and bill will be issued &delivered to consumer during next billing cycle. He also placed on record copy of snaps of showing the binder updation. Consumer was satisfied with the reply of the respondent SDO. After going through the record available in the file and hearing the parties, the Forum decides to dispose off the complaint with the direction that respondent SDO shall ensure that bill is prepared and delivered to consumer in next billing cycle and continuously thereafter. Case is closed. No cost on either side. As required under Haryana State Electricity Regulatory Commission (Guidelines for establishment of Forum for Redressal of Grievances of consumers, Electricity Ombudsman and Consumer Advocacy) Regulations-2016, the implementation of this decision may be intimated to this office within 30 days from the date of its receipt. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 25 th April, (K.D. Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

192 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2117/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: Date of Order: Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: 1. K D Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman 2 Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of complaint of Smt. Madhvi Malik, M-42, old DLF, Sector-14, Gurgaon regarding non receipt of bills. V/s.. Complainant/Petitioner 1 Xen (OP) S/U Division, DHBVN, Gurgaon 2 SDO (OP) Maruti S/Divn. DHBVN, Gurgaon.Respondents Appearance:- For Complainant: Representative For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer/CGRF, DHBVN, Hisar 2 Representative of respondent SDO

193 ORDER Smt. Madhvi Malik, M-42, old DLF, Sector-14, Gurgaon got an electricity connection bearing account No under SDO (OP) Maruti S/D DHBVN, Gurgaon, hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. The complainant has filed the present complaint stating therein that she is not receiving electricity bill since last one year and on follow up a bill amounting to Rs has been delivered. She has requested the forum to redress her complaint. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Gurugram for hearing of the case. Proceedings were held on The representatives of complainant and respondent SDO were present. However, SDO submitted reply vide memo No dated stating that bill could not be generated due to some system error and ticket was raised for the removal of error time and again but same could not be rectified. Now the error has been rectified and bill has been raised to consumer as per reading recorded by the meter and at present a bill of Rs is outstanding against the consumer which is due for payment on The copy of duplicate bill and reply of SDO was handed over to consumer who argued the case in line with written submission and stated that her premises is given on rent and due to non delivery of bills by respondent SDO in time she is unable to recover the same from the tenant. She stressed upon that Licensee may be directed to issue the bills on time so that bills are paid regularly. After going through the record available in the file and hearing the parties, the Forum finds that non delivery of bills by Licensee to consumer is deficiency in service and wants penal action so Forum decides to dispose off the complaint with the direction that penalty of Rs may be levied on the Licensee in view of standard of performance issued by Licensee and same may be credited to account of complainant. Licensee will recover the penalty amount from the official responsible for delay in delivery of bills. Case is closed. No cost on either side. As required under Haryana State Electricity Regulatory Commission (Guidelines for establishment of Forum for Redressal of Grievances of consumers, Electricity Ombudsman and Consumer Advocacy) Regulations-2016, the implementation of this decision may be intimated to this office within 30 days from the date of its receipt. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 25 th April, (K.D. Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

194 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2118/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: Date of Order: Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: 1. K D Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman 2 Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of complaint of Smt. Sunita w/o Sh. Subhash, HN 1322, Gali No.37, Surat Nagar, Phase-II, Gurgaon regarding wrong billing. V/s.. Complainant/Petitioner 1 Xen (OP) City Division, DHBVN, Gurgaon 2 SDO (OP) New Palam Vihar S/Divn. DHBVN, Gurgaon.Respondents Appearance:- For Complainant: Representative For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer/CGRF, DHBVN, Hisar 2 Representative of respondent SDO

195 ORDER Smt. Sunita w/o Sh. Subhash, HN 1322, Gali No.37, Surat Nagar, Phase-II, Gurgaon got an electricity connection bearing account No under SDO (OP) New Palam Vihar S/D DHBVN, Gurgaon, hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint The complainant has filed the present complaint stating therein that wrong bill has been issued to her without taking reading by respondent SDO. The new reading recorded by the meter has been shown as zero whereas bill of Rs has been issued to her. She has requested the forum to redress her complaint. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Gurugram for hearing of the case. Proceedings were held on The representatives of complainant and respondent SDO were present. However, SDO submitted reply vide memo No dated stating that due to non taking of reading by Billing agency energy bill for the month of 02/2018 was generated on average basis and now reading has been verified and correct bill has been issued to consumer during 04/2018. Average charged to consumer has been adjusted in her account. Representative of consumer was present who was satisfied with correction of bill and stated that he does not want to pursue the complaint further. After going through the record available in the file and hearing the parties, the Forum decides to dispose off the complaint with no direction as complaint of the complainant has already been redressed. Case is closed. No cost on either side. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 25 th April, (K.D. Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

196 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2119/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: Date of Order: Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: 1. K D Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman 2 Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of complaint of Smt. Usha Ahuja, HN 713F, Sector-04, Gurgaon regarding interruption in supply & replacement of meter. V/s.. Complainant/Petitioner 1 Xen (OP) City Division, DHBVN, Gurgaon 2 SDO (OP) New Colony S/Divn. DHBVN, Gurgaon.Respondents Appearance:- For Complainant: Representative For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer/CGRF, DHBVN, Hisar 2 Representative of respondent SDO

197 ORDER Smt. Usha Ahuja, HN 713F, Sector-04, Gurgaon got an electricity connection bearing account No under SDO (OP) New Colony S/D DHBVN, Gurgaon, hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. The complainant has filed the present complaint stating therein that she made a request to SDO on regarding fluctuation of electricity at her residence but no action was taken by respondent SDO resulting in damage to electricity appliances. She has requested the forum to redress her complaint. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Gurugram for hearing of the case. Proceedings were held on The representatives of complainant and respondent SDO were present. However, SDO submitted reply vide memo No dated stating that Meter has been changed on vide MCO No dated He further submitted that account of consumer could not be overhauled due to software error. Complaint Ticket has been generated for resolving the error. The representative of SDO stated that when it is tried to correct the bill system shows error as old data segment error. The representative of complainant stated that he made a complaint on and same was marked to Consumer Clerk to issue MCO on same day but no action was taken by respondent SDO. The representative of SDO could not explain the reason for delay in replacement of meter or issue of MCO and the cause of error shown by system. This is a casual way in attending consumer complaints and Forum took serious note of the same. After going through the record available in the file and hearing the parties, the Forum finds that it is a deficiency in service and therefore decides levy of penalty of Rs in view of standard of performance issued by HERC. The penalty amount may be recovered from responsible official and credited to consumer account. Case is closed. No cost on either side. As required under Haryana State Electricity Regulatory Commission (Guidelines for establishment of Forum for Redressal of Grievances of consumers, Electricity Ombudsman and Consumer Advocacy) Regulations-2016, the implementation of this decision may be intimated to this office within 30 days from the date of its receipt. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 25 th April, (K.D. Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

198 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2122/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: Date of Order: Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: 1. K D Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman 2 Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of complaint of Sh. Rohit Mathur, Flat-48, Jawahar Apartment, Plot No.54, Sector-56, Gurgaon regarding wrong billing. V/s.. Complainant/Petitioner 1 Xen (OP) S/U Division, DHBVN, Gurgaon 2 SDO (OP) South City S/Divn. DHBVN, Gurgaon.Respondents Appearance:- For Complainant: Present For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer/CGRF, DHBVN, Hisar 2 Representative respondent SDO

199 ORDER Sh. Rohit Mathur, Flat-48, Jawahar Apartment, Plot No.54, Sector-56,Gurgaon got an electricity connection bearing account No under SDO (OP) South City S/D DHBVN, Gurgaon, hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. The complainant has filed the present complaint stating therein that wrong bill has been issued to him amounting to Rs On being contacted to SDO bill was not corrected and he is facing undue harassment since 9/2017. He has requested the forum to redress his complaint. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Gurugram for hearing of the case. Proceedings were held on The complainant and representatives of respondent SDO were present. However, SDO submitted reply vide memo No dated stating that bill of consumer has been corrected and bill of Rs is outstanding against him. He also placed on record copy of duplicate bill issued to consumer. Consumer was present who argued in line with written submissions ad stated that he is visiting SDO office for 2-3 times in a week since Sept.2017 after taking leave from his office. He requested the Forum to direct respondent Nigam to be careful in issuing the bill and correction thereof. After going through the record available in the file and hearing the parties, the Forum decides to dispose off the complaint with no direction as complaint of the complainant has already been redressed. However, respondent is directed to be careful in future in redressing the complaints received by his office. Case is closed. No cost on either side. As required under Haryana State Electricity Regulatory Commission (Guidelines for establishment of Forum for Redressal of Grievances of consumers, Electricity Ombudsman and Consumer Advocacy) Regulations-2016, the implementation of this decision may be intimated to this office within 30 days from the date of its receipt. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 25 th April, (K.D. Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

200 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2128/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: Date of Order: Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: 1. K D Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman 2 Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of complaint of M/S Indus Tower Ltd. Building No.10, Tower-B, 9 th Floor, DLF Cyber City, Gurgaon regarding wrong billing. V/s 1 Xen (OP) Division, DHBVN, Manesar 2 SDO (OP) S/Divn. DHBVN, Manesar.. Complainant/Petitioner.Respondents Appearance:- For Complainant: Representative of complainant For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer/CGRF, DHBVN, Hisar 2 Representative of respondent SDO

201 ORDER M/S Indus Tower Ltd. Building No.10, Tower-B, 9 th Floor, DLF Cyber City, Gurgaon got an electricity connection bearing account No. ACDS-0019H under SDO (OP) S/D DHBVN, Manesar, hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. The complainant has filed the present complaint stating therein that wrong amount has been charged in their account as they had written a letter to SDO for permanent disconnection on but supply was not disconnected and a bill of Rs has been raised to them in August He has requested the forum to redress his complaint. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Gurugram for hearing of the case. Proceedings were held on The complainant and representatives of respondent SDO were present. However, SDO submitted reply vide memo No. 150 dated stating that consumer extended load from 10 to 28 KW in 06/2016 and billed as per meter reading in 06/16 and 07/2016 and on average basis thereafter. No payment has been made by consumer after resulting in defaulting amount of Rs As a result PDCO was effected on Removed meter was sent to Lab and meter was found defective as per lab record. He also placed on record the copy of PDCO, M&P report dated and M&T lab report dated alongwith consumption pattern of complainant. Representative of complainant stated that they had made a request for disconnection in 9/2016 and supply was not disconnected by respondent SDO despite their request. However he could not place on record the copy of request made by them to respondent Nigam. Representative of SDO contested that complainant got the load extended in 6/2016 so possibility of making request in 9/2016 does not arise. He further stated that bill was raised to consumer regularly but no objection was made by them till complaint in CGRF. Representative of complainant could not explain the reasons and produced documents in his favour. After going through the record available in the file and hearing the parties, the Forum decides to dispose off the complaint with no direction as there is no merit in the complaint and bill has been correctly raised on average basis due to internal defect in the meter. Case is closed. No cost on either side. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 25 th April, (K.D. Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

202 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2091/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing Dated of Order Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: 1 K.D.Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman 2 Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of Sh. Satbir Singh s/o Sh. Tara Chand, VPO Umra, Tehsil Hansi, Hisar regarding wrong billing V/s.. Complainant/Petitioner Appearance:- For Complainant: For the Respondent XEN (OP) Divn. DHBVN, Hansi JE (OP) S/Office DHBVN, Umra Present 1 Nodal Officer CGRF Hisar 2 Representative of Respondent SDO.Respondents

203 ORDER Sh. Satbir Singh s/o Sh. Tara Chand, VPO Umra, Tehsil Hansi, Hisar has got an electricity connection bearing account No. UU1D-0681A under (OP) S/Office Umra, hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. The complainant has filed present complaint stating therein that he is making payment of electricity bills but a huge amount has been levied in his bill. redressal his grievances. The complainant requested for The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Hisar for hearing of the case. The proceedings held at Hisar on The complainant and respondent SDO were present. SDO submitted written reply vide No dated stating therein that wrong bill has been issued to consumer from 5/2013 to 12/2017 on an average of 80 units. During 12/2017 reading recorded by the meter was found to be whereas in 5/2017 reading was He further stated that audit party pointed out the difference of reading charged to consumer and actual reading recorded by meter. On the basis of difference of reading an amount of Rs was charged to consumer. He further stated that bill of complainant has been raised on actual reading recorded by the meter and requested to file the complaint. Complainant was present who agreed to reply even by the respondent SDO. After going through the record available on file and hearing the parties the Forum decides to dispose of the complaint as complaint has already been redressed and consumer is satisfied with the reply by respondent SDO. Case is closed. Party to bear their own cost.. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 6 th April, (K.D.Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

204 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2098/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing Dated of Order Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: 1 K.D.Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman 2 Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member billing In the matter of Smt. Sunita w/o Sh. Anil Kumar, HN 266/Sector-14, Hisar regarding wrong V/s.. Complainant/Petitioner Appearance:- For Complainant: For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer CGRF Hisar 2 Respondent SDO XEN (OP) Divn No.1 DHBVN, Hisar SDO (OP) City DHBVN, Hisar Present.Respondents

205 ORDER Smt. Sunita w/o Sh. Anil Kumar, HN 266/Sector-14, Hisar has got an electricity connection bearing account No under SDO (OP) City Hisar, hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. The complainant has filed present complaint stating therein that on a wrong bill has been issued to her by levying excess units. She checked the meter and found that reading is not visible. She contacted the office of respondent Nigam and meter was replaced by him. She further submitted that her meter was not checked from the Lab and wrong bill was issued without reading. The complainant requested for redressal her grievances. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Hisar for hearing of the case. The proceedings held at Hisar on The complainant and respondent SDO were present. SDO submitted written reply vide No dated stating therein that bill of consumer is correct as bill was raised on actual reading recorded by the meter. During argument he further submitted that during the month of April to August 2233 reading has been recorded by meter which is incommensurate with reading recorded during corresponding period of last year. He requested the forum to file the complaint as bill is correct. He placed on record consumption data from Jan.16 to March-18, copy of MCO and checking report of Lab. After going through the record available on file and hearing the parties the Forum decides to dispose of the complaint as there is no merit in the complaint of complainant. Respondent charged the amount in accordance with the instructions of the Licensee as well as that of HERC. Case is closed. Party to bear their own cost. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 6 th April, (K.D.Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

206 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2101/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing Dated of Order Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: 1 K.D.Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman 2 Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of M/S Indus Tower Ltd. (Samani, Bhuna, Fatehabad) SCO-137/First Floor, Sector-13, UE Karnal(through Mr. MS Chauhan) regarding wrong billing V/s.. Complainant/Petitioner Appearance:- For Complainant: For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer CGRF Hisar 2 Respondent SDO XEN (OP) Divn DHBVN, Tohana SDO (OP) DHBVN, Bhuna Present.Respondents

207 ORDER M/S Indus Tower Ltd. (Samani, Bhuna & Fatehabad) SCO-137/First Floor, Sector-13, UE Karnal (through Mr. MS Chauhan) has got an electricity connection bearing account No. SE-21/1405 under SDO (OP) Bhuna, hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. The complainant has filed present complaint stating therein that they had applied for permanent disconnection to SDO (O) Bhuna and connection was not disconnected on our request despite our regular visit to the o/o SDO. Connected was disconnected on and entry of PDCO has not been made till date. Bills are raised on average basis from 12/16 to-date despite removal of meter 5 months back. He further submitted that meter was working OK on the date of PDCO i.e. on but neither working nor final reading was entered at the time of PDCO. The complainant requested for redressal their grievances. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Hisar for hearing of the case. The proceedings held at Hisar on The complainant and respondent SDO were present. SDO submitted written reply vide No dated stating therein that PDCO of subject cited connection was issued on vide PDCO NO.53/1484 and same was effected on in the presence of M&P team. After effecting PDCO meter and CT of consumer was sent to Lab for testing of accuracy and recording of reading. Since the display of meter was not visible, meter was sent to manufacturing company for further investigation of reading and accuracy. At the time of checking in Lab, one No. M&T seal and both firm seals were found broken. He further submitted that ACD of consumer shall be adjusted after overhauling the account of consumer as per reading reported by manufacturing firm. He also placed on record copy of consumer request dated , copy of PDCO, M&T report dated , Lab report dated and Consumer was present who argued that they have made a request on for disconnection and PDCO was not effected by S/Dn despite their request. He placed on record the copy of request dated He further submitted that they were not using supply after and therefore not liable for any charges. SDO further stated that on the request of consumer PDCO No.53/1484 was effected by area incharge on by disconnecting the supply from pole. At the time of disconnection, on pole final reading was not visible and working of meter was reported as burnt. He further submitted that the application put up by complainant is not available in their record. After going through the record available on file and hearing the parties the Forum decides to dispose of the complaint with the direction that MMC may be recovered from the complainant from to instead of average charges since reading of meter was not visible at the time of disconnection by the field staff from pole. The account of consumer may be overhauled after receipt of report and final reading from the manufacturing firm. Case is closed. Party to bear their own cost.

208 As required under Haryana State Electricity Regulatory Commission (Guidelines for establishment of Forum for Redressal of Grievances of consumers, Electricity Ombudsman and Consumer Advocacy) Regulations-2016, the implementation of this decision may be intimated to this office within 30 days from the date of its receipt. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 9 th April, (K.D.Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

209 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2102/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing Dated of Order Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: 1 K.D.Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman 2 Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of M/S Indus Tower Ltd. (Nehla Fatehabad) SCO-137/First Floor, Sector-13, UE Karnal(through Mr. MS Chauhan) regarding wrong billing V/s.. Complainant/Petitioner Appearance:- For Complainant: For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer CGRF Hisar 2 Respondent SDO XEN (OP) Divn DHBVN, Tohana SDO (OP) DHBVN, Bhuna Present.Respondents

210 ORDER M/S Indus Tower Ltd. (Nehla, Fatehabad) SCO-137/First Floor, Sector-13, UE Karnal (through Mr. MS Chauhan) has got an electricity connection bearing account No. NL-21/2509 under SDO (OP) City Hisar, hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. The complainant has filed present complaint stating therein that they had applied for permanent disconnection to SDO (O) Bhuna and connection was not disconnected on our request despite our regular visit to the o/o SDO. Connected was disconnected on and entry of PDCO has not been made till date. Bills are raised on average basis from 12/16 to-date despite removal of meter 5-6 months back. He further submitted that meter was working OK on the date of PDCO i.e. on but neither working nor final reading was entered at the time of PDCO. The complainant requested for redressal their grievances. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Hisar for hearing of the case. The proceedings held at Hisar on The complainant and respondent SDO were present. SDO submitted written reply vide No dated stating therein that PDCO of subject cited connection was issued on vide PDCO NO.54/1484 and same was effected on He further submitted that MMC has been charged upto date of PDCO and average charge has been adjusted vide SC&AR No.917/143 dated amounting to Rs ACD of consumer has also been adjusted in the consumer a/c vide SC&AR No.932/143 dated against pending defaulting amount. Consumer was present who argued that they have made a request on for disconnection and PDCO was not effected by S/Dn despite their request. He placed on record the copy of request dated He further submitted that they were not using supply after and therefore not liable for any charges. SDO further stated that on the request of consumer PDCO No.54/1484 was effected by area incharge on by disconnecting the supply from pole. At the time of disconnection, on pole final reading was and working of meter was reported as OK. He further submitted that the application put up by complainant is not available in their record. After going through the record available on file and hearing the parties the Forum decides to dispose of the complaint with the direction that MMC may not be recovered from the complainant from to as final reading at the time of disconnection was same as the reading recorded during the month of 10/2017 which substantiates the statement of complainant. ACD of consumer may be adjusted in the month of Jan.2017 and surcharge levied if any on the defaulting amount equal to ACD may be refunded. Case is closed. Party to bear their own cost.

211 As required under Haryana State Electricity Regulatory Commission (Guidelines for establishment of Forum for Redressal of Grievances of consumers, Electricity Ombudsman and Consumer Advocacy) Regulations-2016, the implementation of this decision may be intimated to this office within 30 days from the date of its receipt. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 9 th April, (K.D.Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

212 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2113/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing Dated of Order Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: 1 K.D.Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman 2 Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of Smt. Bimla Devi w/o Sh. Kailash Chander, Bhagat Singh Nagar, Ward No.8, Gali No.8, Hisar regarding wrong billing V/s.. Complainant/Petitioner Appearance:- For Complainant: For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer CGRF Hisar 2 Respondent SDO XEN (OP) Divn No.1 DHBVN, Hisar SDO (OP) City DHBVN, Hisar Present.Respondents

213 ORDER Smt. Bimla Devi w/o Sh. Kailash Chander, Bhagat Singh Nagar, Ward No.8, Gali No.8, Hisar has got an electricity connection bearing account No under SDO (OP) City Hisar, hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. The complainant has filed present complaint stating therein that wrong billing has been issued to her by showing a unit of 2547 in two months. The complainant requested for redressal her grievances. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Hisar for hearing of the case. The proceedings held at Hisar on The complainant and respondent SDO were present. SDO did not submit any reply. However he argued the case and stated that MCO was effected during the month of 11/2016 and same could not be entered in the system upto July However the account of consumer was overhauled and an amount of Rs vide SC&AR No.580/96 and an amount of Rs has been adjusted by the software in the month of July At present a bill of Rs is outstanding against consumer. He also submitted that consumer made a complaint in CM window portal regarding correction of bill and same has been filed during 01/2018. Consumer was present who argued the case in line with written submission. He stated that bill raised to her has been paid by her and accumulation of reading if any of the fault of Nigam and she is not responsible for the same. She stressed upon that she may not be charged on a/c of wrong reading. SDO contested the arguments of complainant and submitted that meter of the consumer got checked from Lab and working found OK. SDO also submitted written reply vide No dated alongwith copy of SC&AR register, MCO and complaint of consumer on the CM Window portal. After going through the record available on file and hearing the parties the Forum decides to dispose of the complaint as there is no merit in the complaint of complainant. Case is closed. Party to bear their own cost. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 9 th April, (K.D.Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

214 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar Telephone No (website: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2115/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: Date of Order: Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: 1 K.D.Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman 2 Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of complaint of Sh. Ishwar Singh, Sheetalpuri Colony, Narwana Road, Jind regarding wrong billing V/s.. Complainant/Petitioner XEN (OP) DHBVN, Jind SDO (OP) S/U I DHBVN, Jind.Respondents Appearance:- For Complainant: Present For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer CGRF Hisar 2 Respondent SDO

215 ORDER Sh. Ishwar Singh, Sheetalpuri Colony, Narwana Road Jind has got an electricity connection bearing account No. SK-11/2153 under (OP) S/U I, Jind has made a complaint and hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint The complainant has filed the present complaint stating therein that bill of Rs has been issued to him. He got the meter checked which is found OK but still a bill of Rs has been raised to him. He is making payment of bills regularly and there is no fault on his part. He requested to get his complaint redressed. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Hisar for hearing of the case. The proceedings held at Hisar on The complainant and respondent SDO were present. The respondent SDO filed written reply vide no dated stating therein that the bill of consumer has been corrected as per consumption basis. He further submitted that meter was replaced in the month of 3/2015 and bill has been corrected for to on the basis of consumption recorded and payments made by complainant during the period has also been adjusted. Reading of the meter was found to be 5342 as on He also placed on record the copy of calculation sheet. Consumer was present who submitted that he is making the payment regularly and now is not in a position to make the payment in one lot. He requested the forum to allow him payment in installments without surcharge. After going through the record on file and hearing the party, the Forum finds that it is a case of accumulation of reading and bill has been corrected by respondent SDO as per the instructions/tariff applicable and reading recorded by meter as is evident from photo of meter reading placed on record. However, Forum decides to accept the pending amount in three installments alongwith current bill without levying surcharge on the balance amount. The case is closed. Both the parties to bear their own cost. As required under Haryana State Electricity Regulatory Commission (Guidelines for establishment of Forum for Redressal of Grievances of consumers, Electricity Ombudsman and Consumer Advocacy) Regulations-2016, the implementation of this decision may be intimated to this office within 30 days from the date of its receipt. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 9 th April, (K.D.Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

216 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2105/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: Date of Order : Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: K.D Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of complaint of Sh. Amar Singh s/o Sh. Puran Singh, VPO Bawania, Narnaul, Mohindergarh regarding correction of bill V/s.. Complainant/Petitioner XEN (OP) DHBVN Mohindergarh SDO (OP) S/Divn DHBVN Mohindergarh Appearance:-.Respondents For Complainant: Present For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer CGRF DHBVN Hisar. 2 Respondent SDO

217 ORDER Sh. Amar Singh s/o Sh. Puran Singh, VPO Bawania, Narnaul, Mohindergarh has got an electricity connection bearing account No. BW/1DD457 under SDO, OP DHBVN, Mohindergarh hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. He filed the present complaint stating that he is getting wrong bill since last two months. He requested the Forum to redress his grievance. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Narnaul for hearing of the case. The proceedings held at Narnaul on The complainant and respondent SDO were present. SDO submitted reply vide memo No. 195 dated stating therein that meter of above consumer was changed vide MCO NO.34/751 dated Earlier bill was raised on D-code by charging 80 units bimonthly. At the time of changing the meter, the reading was found whereas billing was made upto 6986 reading and difference of reading charged to consumer. He further submitted that account of consumer has been overhauled on and consumer is satisfied with the correction of bill. SDO also submitted on record the copies of sundry and revised bill. The consumer was present who was satisfied with the reply and stated that he has paid the balance payment after correction. After considering facts of the case and hearing the parties, the Forum decides to dispose of complaint as grievance of consumer has already been redressed.. Case is closed. No cost on either side. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 19 th April, (K.D.Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

218 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2106/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: Date of Order : Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: K.D Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of complaint of Sh. Hari Ram s/o Sh. Kalu Ram, VPO Akbarpur, Mohindergarh regarding shifting of line V/s.. Complainant/Petitioner XEN (OP) DHBVN Narnaul SDO (OP) S/Divn DHBVN Nangal Chaudhary Appearance:-.Respondents For Complainant: Present For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer CGRF DHBVN Hisar. 2 Respondent SDO

219 ORDER Sh. Hari Ram s/o Sh. Kalu Ram, VPO Akbarpur, Mohindergarh has got an electricity connection under SDO, OP DHBVN Nangal Chaudhary hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. He filed the present complaint stating that he is resident of village Akbarpur and HT/LT line is passing through his plot. The plot is situated inside the Lal Dora and requested the Forum to get the line shifted. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Narnaul for hearing of the case. The proceedings held at Narnaul on The complainant and respondent SDO were present. SDO stated that he could not prepared reply due to late receipt of complaint and assured that reply will be submitted by next working date. Reply was submitted reply vide memo No. 814 dated stating therein that estimate for subject cited shifting of HT LT line has been framed and work will be carried out on departmental basis. Consumer was present who argued his case in line with written submission and also submitted a report from revenue authorities verifying the facts of location of residence. Original copy of same was given to respondent SDO. After considering facts of the case and hearing the parties, the Forum decides to dispose of complaint with the direction that line passing through the house of complainant may be shifted at the cost of Nigam as the house of complainant is located within the Lal Dora.. Case is closed. No cost on either side. As required under Haryana State Electricity Regulatory Commission (Guidelines for establishment of Forum for Redressal of Grievances of consumers, Electricity Ombudsman and Consumer Advocacy) Regulations-2016, the implementation of this decision may be intimated to this office within 30 days from the date of its receipt. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 19 th April, (K.D.Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

220 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2107/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: Date of Order : Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: K.D Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of complaint of Smt. Shubhali d/o Sh. Harphool, VPO Karota, Narnaul, Mohindergarh regarding release of connection V/s.. Complainant/Petitioner XEN (OP) DHBVN Narnaul SDO (OP) S/Divn DHBVN Nangal Chaudhary Appearance:-.Respondents For Complainant: None For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer CGRF DHBVN Hisar. 2 Respondent SDO

221 ORDER Smt. Shubhali d/o Sh. Harphool, VPO Karota, Narnaul, Mohindergarh has applied for S/Phase electricity connection under SDO, OP DHBVN Nangal Chaudhary hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. She filed the present complaint stating that she is residing at his well since last few years. Due to canal water her well has become operational. She requested to get S/P connection released at her well. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Narnaul for hearing of the case. The proceedings held at Narnaul on The complainant was not present but respondent SDO was present. SDO submitted reply vide his memo No. 806 dated stating therein that subject cited complainant has not applied for release of any connection to his office. He further submitted that after going through the contents of application, it is gathered that complainant is interested in taking connection for AP category which is prohibited in Nangal Chaudhary block being dark zone area. He requested the forum to file the complaint. Neither the complainant nor her representative was present during the hearing. After considering facts of the case and hearing the parties, the Forum decides to dispose of complaint as there is no merit in the complaint and AP connection can not be released in dark zone area. Case is closed. No cost on either side. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 19 th April, (K.D.Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

222 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2109/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: Date of Order : Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: K.D Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of complaint of Sh. Ramesh Chand s/o Sh. Ram Niwas, near Railway Phatak, Dhanoa Road, Ateli Mandi regarding replacement of conductor and pole V/s.. Complainant/Petitioner XEN (OP) DHBVN Narnaul SDO (OP) S/Divn DHBVN Ateli Mandi Appearance:-.Respondents For Complainant: None For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer CGRF DHBVN Hisar. 2 Respondent SDO

223 ORDER Sh. Ramesh Chand s/o Sh. Ram Niwas, near Railway Phatak, Dhanoa Road, Ateli Mandi has got an electricity connection bearing account No. CT-31/007SP under SDO, OP DHBVN Ateli Mandi hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. He filed the present complaint stating that during March 2015 two poles fell down due to rain and windstorm. The line was connected to H Pole of Reliance Co. Nigam has assured that poles shall be erected in due course but till date poles have not been erected so far. He requested the Forum to redress his grievance. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Narnaul for hearing of the case. The proceedings held at Narnaul on The complainant was not present and respondent SDO was present. SDO submitted reply vide memo No dated stating therein that existing HT line is far away from the house of complainant and there is no hindrance to the residence of complainant. He further stated that existing line is as per standard and horizontal/vertical clearance is as per norms, He also put the photos of site sketch of the line. Neither complainant nor his representative was present. After considering facts of the case and hearing the parties, the Forum decides to dispose of complaint as there is no merit of complaint and line is erected properly with proper clearance. Case is closed. No cost on either side. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 19 th April, (K.D.Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

224 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2110/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: Date of Order : Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: K.D Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of complaint of Sh. Umrao Singh s/o Sh. Shed Shai, Village Khanpur, PO Mandhana, Tehsil,Narnaul, Distt Mohindergarh regarding wrong billing V/s.. Complainant/Petitioner XEN (OP) DHBVN Narnaul SDO (OP) S/U S/Divn DHBVN Narnaul Appearance:-.Respondents For Complainant: Present For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer CGRF DHBVN Hisar. 2 Respondent SDO

225 ORDER Sh. Umrao Singh s/o Sh. Shed Shai, Village Khanpur, PO Mandhana, Tehsil Narnaul, Distt. Mohindergarh, has got an electricity connection bearing account No. RR1D-2250 under SDO, OP S/U DHBVN Narnaul hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. He filed the present complaint stating that since last two months he is getting abnormal bills. On dated he received a bill of Rs and same was paid by him. Again during March a bill of Rs has been raised which is wrong and is not commensurate with his consumption. He requested the Forum to redress his grievance. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Narnaul for hearing of the case. The proceedings held at Narnaul on The complainant and respondent SDO were present. SDO submitted reply vide No. 199 dated stating therein that bill of complainant has been rectified vide SC&AR No.82/286 and an amount of Rs has been adjusted. The consumer was present who was satisfied with the adjustment of bill. After considering facts of the case and hearing the parties, the Forum decides to dispose of complaint as complaint has already been redressed. Case is closed. No cost on either side. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 19 th April, (K.D.Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

226 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2108/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: Date of Order : Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: K.D Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of complaint of Sh. Rakesh Yadav PACS the M/Bachhod Primary Agriculture Co-Op Socieity Ltd. Bachhold, Distt Mohindergarh regarding wrong billing V/s.. Complainant/Petitioner XEN (OP) DHBVN Narnaul SDO (OP) S/U S/Divn DHBVN Ateli. Appearance:-.Respondents For Complainant: None For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer CGRF DHBVN Hisar. 2 Respondent SDO

227 ORDER Sh. Rakesh Yadav PACS the M/Bachhod Primary Agriculture Co-Op Socieity Ltd. Bachhold, Distt Mohindergarh, has got an electricity connection bearing account No. B under SDO, OP DHBVN Ateli hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. He filed the present complaint stating that wrong bills are issued to them since Dec He is visiting S/D office since then but no action has been by the S/D He requested the Forum to redress his grievance. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Narnaul for hearing of the case. The proceedings held at Narnaul on The complainant was not present but respondent SDO was present. SDO submitted reply vide No dated stating therein that bill of consumer has been corrected and balance payment has been made by the complainant and as such he is satisfied with the correction of bill. SDO placed on record the copy of sundry and ledger. Neither complainant nor his representative was present. After considering facts of the case and hearing the parties, the Forum decides to file the complaint as complaint has already been redressed. Case is closed. No cost on either side. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 19 th April, (K.D.Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

228

229 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2120/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: Date of Order Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: K.D.Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the complaint of Sh. Bani Singh s/o Hari Chand, HN 3462, Sayad Sarai, Rewari regarding wrong billing V/s XEN (OP) Divn. DHBVN, Rewari SDO (OP) City-2, DHBVN, Rewari.. Complainant/Petitioner Appearance:- For Complainant: Present.Respondents For the Respondent Nodal Officer CGRF Hisar. Respondent SDO

230 ORDER Sh. Bani Singh s/o Hari Chand, HN 3462, Sayad Sarai, Rewari has got an electricity connection bearing account No under SDO, OP City-2. DHBVN Rewari hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. He filed the present complaint stating therein that he is getting very high bill due to billing in KVAH. He made a complaint to Nigam SDO and on being enquired found that difference in KVAH and KWH reading is due to non installation of capacitor. In the month of December he got the capacitor installed. He requested the Forum to redress his grievance. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Narnaul for hearing of the case. The proceedings held at Narnaul on The complainant and respondent SDO were present. SDO submitted reply vide memo No.1142 dated stating therein that meter of above consumer was replaced on for installing KVAH facility meter. After that billing of consumer is being done KVAH reading. There is difference in KVAH and KWH reading as consumer had not installed the proper capacitor. He further submitted that they have informed the consumer to get meter checked from Lab if he agrees. SDO also placed on record the ledger copy and letter written to complainant regarding checking of meter from Lab. Complainant was present who argued his case in line with written submission and submitted that he was not aware about the lower capacity of capacitor and he was also not informed by the Nigam. Bill was raised to him for four moths resulting in loss to him. After considering facts of the case and hearing the parties, the Forum decides to dispose of complaint as there is no merit in the complaint.. Case is closed. No cost on either side. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 19 th April, (K.D.Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

231 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2114/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: Date of Order: Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: 1. K D Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman 2 Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of complaint of Sh. Harminder Singh s/o Sh. Pardhan Singh, HN 34/D Block CMK College Road Sirsa, regarding wrong billing V/s.. Complainant/Petitioner 1 Xen/Op. City Division, DHBVN, Sirsa 2 SDO (OP) I/A DHBVN, Sirsa.Respondents Appearance:- For Complainant: Representative For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer/CGRF, DHBVN, Hisar 2 Representative of Respondent SDO

232 ORDER Sh. Harminder Singh s/o Sh. Pardhan Singh, HN 34/D Block CMK College Road Sirsa, has got an electricity connection bearing account No under SDO/Op I/A DHBVN, Sirsa, hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. The complainant has filed the present complaint stating therein that wrong bill has been issued to him in March-2018 amounting to Rs which is wrong. He requested Forum to get his grievance redressed. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Sirsa for hearing of the case. The proceedings were held at Sirsa on Consumer s representative and SDO s representatives were present. SDO submitted written reply vide memo No dated stating therein that complainant has a domestic connection with sanctioned load as 1.9 KW. Premises of consumer was checked on vide LL1 No.35/653. He was found using unauthorized load and reading of meter was found invisible. Meter was sent to Lab for verification but reading could not be retrieved by the Lab. He also submitted on record copy of LL1 dated , Lab report dated and consumption data of consumer from to Consumer argued the case in line with written statement and stated that average for the month of 12/2017 to 02/2018 has been charged as per average of summer season whereas consumption recorded during the month is less as it is a winter season. He requested the Forum to charge the amount as per corresponding month. After hearing both the parties and going through the record, the Forum decides to dispose of the complaint with the direction that bill for the period top may be charged on the basis of consumption recorded in the corresponding period of last year and same may be increased in proportionate of extended load found. Case is closed. No cost on either side. As required under Haryana State Electricity Regulatory Commission (Guidelines for establishment of Forum for Redressal of Grievances of consumers, Electricity Ombudsman and Consumer Advocacy) Regulations-2016, the implementation of this decision may be intimated to this office within 30 days from the date of its receipt. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 20 th April, (K.D. Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

233 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2125/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: Date of Order: Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: 1. K D Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman 2 Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of complaint of Sh. Singara Singh s/o Sh. Karnail Singh, Village Lahangewala, PO Bada Gudha, Sirsa, regarding release of tubewell connection V/s.. Complainant/Petitioner 1 Xen/Op. City Division, DHBVN, Dabwali 2 SDO (OP) DHBVN, Kalanwali.Respondents Appearance:- For Complainant: Present For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer/CGRF, DHBVN, Hisar 2 Representative of Respondent SDO

234 ORDER Sh. Singara Singh s/o Sh. Karnail Singh, Village Lahangewala, PO Bada Gudha, Sirsa, has applied for an electricity tubewell connection under SDO/OP DHBVN, Kalanwali, hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. The complainant has filed the present complaint stating therein that he applied for tubewell connection 7-8 years back. Evan an amount of Rs had been deposited with the Nigam but since last 5 years connection has not been released to him nor any notice was given. He requested Forum to get his grievance redressed. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Sirsa for hearing of the case. The proceedings were held at Sirsa on Consumer was present and representative of SDO were present. SDO did not submit written reply on the plea that reply could not be prepared due to non availability of respondent SDO. However, he submitted that application of complainant has been cancelled on due to non compliance of demand notice. Consumer applied for renewal of application on i.e. after a period of more than two years. Application could not be renewed as it was applied after the stipulated period of two years. He further submitted that demand notice was issued to him on and third and last notice was issued to consumer vide memo No.119 dated Consumer was present who stated that he is visiting the office since last 5 years and neither the demand notice was handed over to him nor any notice was received by him. The delay in filing application for renewal is circumstantial and not intentional. After hearing both the parties and going through the record, the Forum decides to dispose of the complaint as there is no merit in the complaint. Case is closed. No cost on either side. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 20 th April, (K.D. Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

235 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2127/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: Date of Order: Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: 1. K D Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman 2 Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of complaint of Sh. Puran Chand s/o Sh. Manohar Lal, Mohalla Sikligar, Ward No.1, Chattargarh Patti, Sirsa, regarding wrong billing V/s.. Complainant/Petitioner 1 Xen/Op. City Division, DHBVN, Sirsa 2 SDO (OP) I/A DHBVN, Sirsa.Respondents Appearance:- For Complainant: None For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer/CGRF, DHBVN, Hisar 2 Representative of Respondent SDO

236 ORDER Sh. Puran Chand s/o Sh. Manohar Lal, Mohalla Sikligar, Ward No.1, Chattargarh Patti, Sirsa, has got an electricity connection bearing account No under SDO/Op I/A DHBVN, Sirsa, hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. The complainant has filed the present complaint stating therein that due to illness he could not make the payment of electricity bill and supply was disconnected on a defaulting amount of Rs but his bill has been increased to Rs without any reason. He requested Forum to get his grievance redressed. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear b efore the Forum on at Sirsa for hearing of the case. The proceedings were held at Sirsa on Consumer was not present but representative of SDO was present. SDO submitted written reply vide memo No dated stating therein that due to defaulting amount the connection of consumer was disconnected on An amount of Rs was outstanding against the consumer at the time of disconnection. Surcharge has been levied on the outstanding amount upto 6 months resulting in increase of amount. Complaint of consumer is baseless and needs to be filed. Neither the complainant nor his representative was present. After hearing both the parties and going through the record, the Forum decides to dispose of the complaint with no direction as there is no merit in the complaint of complainant. Case is closed. No cost on either side. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 20 th April, (K.D. Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

237 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2062/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: Date of Order: Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: 1 K.D.Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman 2 Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of complaint of Sh. Jagbir Singh s/o Sh Bihari Lal, Rohtak Road, Ch. Dadri Bhiwani regarding wrong billing... Complainant/Petitioner V/s 1 Xen (OP) Division, DHBVN, Ch. Dadri 2 SDO (OP)City DHBVN, Ch. Dadri Appearance:-.Respondents For Complainant: Present For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer/CGRF, DHBVN, Hisar 2 Representative of Respondent SDO

238 ORDER Sh. Jagbir Singh s/o Sh Bihari Lal, Rohtak Road, Ch. Dadri got an electricity connection bearing account No under SDO (OP) City DHBVN Ch. Dadri, hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. The complainant has filed the present complaint stating therein that has been billed wrongly for fixed charges and average billing even after meter is running OK an after replacement of old meter. The complainant requested for the waival of wrong surcharge for taking action against the official who could not serve correct bill even after meter running OK. He also requested for waival of fixed charges. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Bhiwani for hearing of the case. Proceedings of the case were held at Bhiwani on The complainant & representative of respondent SDO were present. The respondent SDO filed written reply vide No. 860 dated stating therein that after going through the contents of complaint and scrutinizing the ledger of subject cited consumer it has been found that wrongly levied fixed charges were adjusted during April-2013 alongwith surcharge. The bills which were wrongly billed on average have also been rectified and adjusted on time. He also submitted that consumer made payment of Rs.1.0 lac during April-2013 and no payment was made thereafter. At present an amount of Rs is outstanding at the end of Feb.2018 which is correct and payable by consumer. He also placed on record ledger copy from Jan.2012 to Feb Reply of SDO was given to consumer who argued that average charged to him during Nov.2013 to Jan.2014 has not been adjusted. Similarly, average billed from Nov.2015 to July-2017 has not been adjusted. Representative of SDO was present who contested that average charged during Nov.2013 to Jan.2014 has been adjusted in Feb Similarly average charged from May to July has been adjusted during July After going through the record on case file and hearing the parties, the Forum finds that there is no merit in the complaint as average charged to the consumer alongwith fixed charges levied and surcharge on this amount stands adjusted. Complaint is disposed of with no direction. Case is closed. Both the parties to bear their own costs. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 16 th March, (K.D.Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

239 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2063/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: Date of Order: Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: 1 K.D.Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman 2 Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of complaint of Smt. Darshna Devi w/o Sh Lilu, VPO Umrawat Bhiwani regarding wrong billing... Complainant/Petitioner V/s 1 Xen (OP) Division, DHBVN, Bhiwani 2 SDO (OP)S/U No.2 DHBVN, Ch. Dadri Appearance:-.Respondents For Complainant: Present For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer/CGRF, DHBVN, Hisar 2 Representative of Respondent SDO

240 ORDER Smt. Darshna Devi w/o Sh Lilu, VPO Umrawat Bhiwani got an electricity connection bearing account No. TU1D-0433 under SDO (OP) S/UNo.2 DHBVN Bhiwani, hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. The complainant has filed the present complaint stating therein that she opted for surcharge waival scheme and deposited around Rs in installments but amount has not been reduced from the bills alongwith surcharge. The complainant requested to redressed her complaint. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Bhiwani for hearing of the case. Proceedings of the case were held at Bhiwani on The complainant & respondent SDO were present. The respondent SDO filed written reply vide No.1050 dated stating therein that consumer has paid Rs respectively in four installments and same amount has already been posted in her account. Account of consumer has also been overhauled and an amount of Rs has been refunded vide SC&AR No.322/93. He further submitted that an amount of Rs is outstanding against her and surcharge shall be refunded only after payment of last installment. Consumer was present who stated that surcharge should be refunded, payment, if any shall be paid by her. After going through the record on case file and hearing the parties, the Forum finds that an installment of payment is due against the payment and surcharge can only be refunded if she complied with the instructions issued under surcharge waival scheme. The form decides to dispose of complaint in viw of reply submitted by SDO as there is no merit in the complaint. Case is closed. Both the parties to bear their own costs. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 16 th March, (K.D.Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

241 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2096/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: Date of Order: Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: 1 K.D.Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman 2 Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of complaint of Sh. Mahender Rana on behalf of M/S Indus Tower Ltd.(Sanwar Ch.Dadri) SCO 137, FF, Sector-13/UE Karnal regarding wrong billing... Complainant/Petitioner V/s 1 Xen (OP) Division, DHBVN, Ch. Dadri 2 SDO (OP)No.2 DHBVN, Sanjarwas Appearance:-.Respondents For Complainant: Present For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer/CGRF, DHBVN, Hisar 2 Representative of Respondent SDO

242 ORDER M/S Indus Tower Ltd.(Sanwar Ch.Dadri) SCO 137, FF, Sector-13/UE Karnal (through Sh. Mahender Rana) got an electricity connection bearing account No. CS-21/0166 under SDO (OP) DHBVN Sanjarwas, hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. The complainant has filed the present complaint stating therein that wrong bill from 8/11 to 6/16 has not been adjusted after replacement of meter vide MCO No.16/103 dated They took up matter with respondent SDO on but no action was taken by him. He further submitted that a wrong reading was recorded in Jan.2016 and Feb.2016 resulting in excess billing of units. He further submitted that meter was checked on and as per M&P checking report the MF of meter is.6 which remained same upto 6/16. Billing was not made during this period on actual MF and thus excess units of have been charged to them. The complainant requested to redress their complaint. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Bhiwani for hearing of the case. Proceedings of the case were held at Bhiwani on The representative of complainant & respondent SDO were present. The respondent SDO filed written reply vide No. 753 dated stating therein that bills for the period 8/11 to 8/14 were raised on average basis as per sanctioned load and as such question of application of wrong MF in energy bills during this period does not arise. For the period 9/14 to 6/16 bill was raised by taking units on average basis and considering MF as one. Amount of Rs has already been given in the account for average/wrong billing and refund was given MF as one so question of refund by treating MF as.6 is not justified. He also submitted that an amount of Rs has been given in SC&AR No.185/103 on in the bill of 1/2018. Amount of FSA charged in 5/16 and 6/16 has already been refunded in 11/2017. Question of refund of amount Rs paid on line by complainant has already been refunded in 10/2015. He requested the Forum to file complaint as all the necessary adjustments have already been made. SDO also placed on record the copy of ledger from Jan,2011 to 3/2018 showing an outstanding of (-) Rs against the consumer. SDO also raised the question of time bar as he did not raise any question regarding provisional billing before whereas wrong bill was issued in 8/2011. The consumer was present and contested that since sundry has been made in the month of 11/17 so the cause of action arose during 11/17 and complaint is within time. He also contested that wrong reading was corrected by making adjustment of Rs is not correct as FSA has not been accounted for. He also contested that provisional reading raised form 8/11 to 8/14 was also adjustable as per actual MF.

243 that After going through the record on case file and hearing the parties, the Forum observed 1. Provisional billing has been made from 8/11 to Jan.2014 so the contention of complainant that billing was raised on provisional basis is not correct. Reading recorded during Jan.2014 was units. 2. Form also observed that an amount of Rs has been allowed in April 2013 and an amount of Rs in Feb.,2015, April-2015 and Rs in July Rs has been adjusted in Oct On going through the record, the forum finds no merit in complaint and therefore decides to dispose of the complaint with no direction. Case is closed. Both the parties to bear their own costs. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 16 th March, (K.D.Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

244 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2097/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: Date of Order: Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: 1 K.D.Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman 2 Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of complaint of Mahender Singh on behalf of M/S Indus Tower Ltd.(Sanwar Ch.Dadri) SCO 137, FF, Sector-13/UE Karnal regarding wrong billing... Complainant/Petitioner V/s 1 Xen (OP) Division, DHBVN, Ch. Dadri 2 SDO (OP) DHBVN, Sanjarwas Appearance:-.Respondents For Complainant: Present For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer/CGRF, DHBVN, Hisar 2 Representative of Respondent SDO

245 ORDER M/S Indus Tower Ltd.(Sanwar Ch.Dadri) SCO 137, FF, Sector-13/UE Karnal (through Sh. Mahender Rana) got an electricity connection bearing account No. CS-21/0168 under SDO (OP) DHBVN Sanjarwas, hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. The complainant has filed the present complaint stating therein that an amount of Rs has been wrongly debited in their account. They took up matter with respondent SDO on but no action was taken by him. He further submitted that old meter was replaced with LT CT meter on and MF was reported to be 6.0. He further submitted that the bill for 11/2013 to 1/2014 was raised for 6400 units by taking MF 1.0 whereas as per M&P report dated reading of meter is 4926 KWH and thus excess amount has been charged to them. The complainant requested to redress their complaint. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Bhiwani for hearing of the case. Proceedings of the case were held at Bhiwani on The representative of complainant & representative of respondent SDO were present. The respondent SDO filed written reply vide No. 752 dated stating therein that meter was replaced as per Lab report from whole current meter to LT CT Meter on with MF as 6.0. Bill was raised for 6400 units from Nov.2013 to Jan.2014 for 6400 units by taking MF as 1.0. Bill was corrected as pointed out audit party by taking MF 6.0. and refunding the units already charged to consumer. He submitted that since Mf was corrected and amount charges correct so complaint may be filed. The consumer was present and contested the version of SDO and sted that as per report of M&P reading 4926 on so his account cannot be overhauled on the basis of 6400 units taking arbitrarily. After going through the record on case file and hearing the parties, the Forum finds that wrong charges have been levied against consumer and therefore decides that account of consumer may be overhauled from 11/2013 to as per actual reading and excess charge if any may be refunded to them. Case is closed. Both the parties to bear their own costs. As required under Haryana State Electricity Regulatory Commission (Guidelines for establishment of Forum for Redressal of Grievances of consumers, Electricity Ombudsman and Consumer Advocacy) Regulations-2016, the implementation of this decision may be intimated to this office within 30 days from the date of its receipt. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 16 th March, (K.D.Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

246 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar Hisar Telephone No (website: ( id: Case No. DH/CGRF- 1984/2017 Date of Institution: 07/12/2017 Date of Hearing: 22/12/2017, & Date of Order: Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: 1 K.D.Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman 2 Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of complaint of Sh. Virender Singh, Flat NO.401,Shivalik Apartment, Sector-46, Faridabad regarding wrong billing. V/s.. Complainant/Petitioner 1 XEN (OP) Divn. DHBVN, Old Faridabad 2 SDO (OP) Sub Divn.No.4, DHBVN, Faridabad Appearance:- For Complainant: Present.Respondents For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer CGRF Hisar. 2 Respondent SDO

247 ORDER Sh. Virender Singh, Flat No. 401,Shivalik Apartment Sector-46, Faridabad has got an electricity connection bearing account No under (OP) Sub-Division No.4, DHBVN, Faridabad hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. The complainant has filed the present complaint stating therein that his meter was running fast resulting into high consumption of electricity during the period 7/2014 to 11/2015 which has no parity with past consumption of same period. The Nigam removed the meter for checking. However the meter lost before actual checking. His bill has not been corrected without any fault at his end. He requested for redressal of grievance by correcting the bill. The complainant has further stated that an appeal in the same matter filed before the consumer court of Faridabad and still pending for adjudication The case was heard during the sitting of CGRF at Faridabad on and complainant was informed that no proceedings in the matter can be conducted by this forum as the matter is already pending before the Consumer Court at Faridabad. The consumer requested the Forum to keep the case listed as he intends to withdraw the case from the Consumer Court at Faridabad and submit the withdrawal proof on next date. On the written request of complainant, the case is adjourned to next date. Proceedings were held at Faridabad on Complainant was present during the sitting at Faridabad on and requested to keep the case pending in the Forum till another date as the formality of withdrawal of case is under process at his end. As per request case is adjourned to next date. Proceedings were held at Faridabad on Complainant and respondent SDO were present. Complainant produced the copy of orders passed by permanent Lok Adalat regarding withdrawal of his complaint. Consumer submitted that a bill of Rs was raised to him for to He approached the Licensee to rectify the bill as his meter was running very fast resulting in high consumption of electricity. On his request, official of DHBVN visited his premises and removed meter for Lab examination. He further submitted that department lost the meter before testing from Lab and refused to rectify his bill on the basis of past and future consumption. SDO was present and submitted that consumer was billed on average basis for the month of 5/2015 to 11/15 and average consumption billed to consumer has been refunded during the month of March-2016 vide SC&AR No.186/R203. He further submitted that bill was raised to consumer on acrtual reading recorded by meter. Consumer contested that his meter was recording abnormal reading

248 which has no parity with his past and future consumption. Deptt failed to get his meter examined from Lab and misplaced meter in due course. He stressed upon the Forum to either get meter checked from Lab or charge abnormal consumption on the basis of past or future consumption whichever suits to Nigam. SDO submitted that since meter has been lost so he is unable to get meter checked from Lab. After going through the records and hearing the parties, the Forum observed that Licensee failed to get meter checked from Lab and same was misplaced by official of Licensee, this is deficiency on the part of Licensee and therefore Forum decides to dispose of the complaint with the direction that bill of consumer from to be overhauled on the basis of consumption recorded from to The Forum further directs that departmental disciplinary action may be taken against official incharge responsible for keeping the meter in safe custody. Case is closed and parties to bear their own cost. As required under Haryana State Electricity Regulatory Commission (Guidelines for establishment of Forum for Redressal of Grievances of consumers, Electricity Ombudsman and Consumer Advocacy) Regulations-2016, the implementation of this decision may be intimated to this office within 30 days from the date of its receipt. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 15 th March (K.D. Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

249 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2043/2018 Date of Institution: 16/01/2018 Date of Hearing: Date of Order: Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: 1 K.D.Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman 2 Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of complaint of Sh. Umesh Kumar, HN 2M/40-2 nd Floor,2-M Block, NH-2 Faridabad regarding change of billing cycle. V/s.. Complainant/Petitioner 1 XEN (OP) Divn. DHBVN, NIT Faridabad 2 SDO (OP) Sub Divn.No.2, DHBVN, Faridabad Appearance:- For Complainant: Present.Respondents For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer CGRF Hisar. 2 Representative of Respondent SDO

250 ORDER Sh. Umesh Kumar, HN 2M/40-2 nd Floor,2-M Block, NH-2, Faridabad has got an electricity connection bearing account No under (OP) Sub-Division No.2, DHBVN, Faridabad hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. The complainant has filed the present complaint stating therein that his meter is installed in 2M block whereas his billing cycling in allotted in Dabuwa colony as a result he is raised bill on average basis and no bill is issued to him. He requested the Forum to get his complaint redressed. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Faridabad for hearing of the case. The proceedings of the case held at Faridabad on The complainant and representative of SDO were present. The complainant argued the case in line with written statement. SDO submitted reply vide memo No dated stating that consumer account was put inadvertantly in 7U Group binder instead of 1U in the system. Now matter has been taken up with RAPDRP system and assured the Forum that binder will be changed by next billing cycle and consumer shall be delivered correct bill. Consumer agreed the submission by SDO. After going through the records and hearing the parties, the Forum decides to dispose of the complaint with the direction that binder of complainant may be changed and he shall be delivered the bill after taking meter reading and allotting correct binder before next billing cycle. Case is closed and parties to bear their own cost. As required under Haryana State Electricity Regulatory Commission (Guidelines for establishment of Forum for Redressal of Grievances of consumers, Electricity Ombudsman and Consumer Advocacy) Regulations-2016, the implementation of this decision may be intimated to this office within 30 days from the date of its receipt. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 15 th March (K.D. Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

251 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2064/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: Date of Order: Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: 1 K.D.Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman 2 Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of complaint of Sh. Surya Lok, HN 1031A, Sector-29 HB Colony Faridabad regarding correction of bill V/s.. Complainant/Petitioner 1 XEN (OP) Divn. DHBVN, Old Faridabad 2 SDO (OP) Sub Divn West, DHBVN, Faridabad Appearance:- For Complainant: Present.Respondents For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer CGRF Hisar. 2 Respondent SDO

252 ORDER Sh. Surya Lok, HN 1031A, Sector-29 HB Colony, Faridabad has got an electricity connection bearing account No under (OP) Sub-Division West, DHBVN, Faridabad hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. The complainant has filed the present complaint stating therein that an electricity bill in Feb.2018 has been raised to him by showing very high consumptions. Consumption recorded by meter from to i.e. in 331 days is 2479 units whereas he has been billed for 1775 units in 44 days from to which is 5 times of previous bill cycle. He requested the Forum to get his complaint redressed. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Faridabad for hearing of the case. The proceedings of the case held at Faridabad on The complainant and SDO were present. The complainant argued the case in line with written statement. SDO submitted reply vide memo No. 221 dated stating that meter of consumer was checked on and found meter working OK and reading as 5942 KWH. Consumer was billed from to as per consumption recorded by meter in 73 days. There is no provisional billing and bill has been raised on actual consumption basis. Bill is correct and rightly payable by consumer. He requested the forum to file the complaint. Complainant argued the case and stated that his consumption can not be so high in two months whereas reading recorded prior to that is normal. After going through the records and hearing the parties, the Forum finds that there is no abnormality in the bill raised to consumer. However for the satisfaction of consumer the Forum directs that meter of complainant may be got checked from Lab. Case is closed and parties to bear their own cost. As required under Haryana State Electricity Regulatory Commission (Guidelines for establishment of Forum for Redressal of Grievances of consumers, Electricity Ombudsman and Consumer Advocacy) Regulations-2016, the implementation of this decision may be intimated to this office within 30 days from the date of its receipt. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 15 th March (K.D. Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

253 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2065/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: Date of Order: Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: 1 K.D.Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman 2 Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of complaint of Smt. Suman Devi w/o Sukhpal Singh, G-1-238, Indira Enclave, Sanjay Colony Faridabad regarding wrong billing V/s.. Complainant/Petitioner 1 XEN (OP) Divn. DHBVN, Old Faridabad 2 SDO (OP) Sub Divn No.4, DHBVN, Faridabad Appearance:- For Complainant: None.Respondents For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer CGRF Hisar. 2 Respondent SDO

254 ORDER Smt. Suman Devi w/o Sukhpal Singh, G-1-238, Indira Enclave, Sanjay Colony, Faridabad has got an electricity connection bearing account No under (OP) Sub- Division 4, DHBVN, Faridabad hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. The complainant has filed the present complaint stating therein that no representative of DHBVN visited premises for meter reading and bills are issued on assumed reading basis. Units charged for Sept. and Nov. are very low whereas she has been charged excessively for Jan Se requested the Forum to get her complaint redressed. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Faridabad for hearing of the case. The proceedings of the case held at Faridabad on The complainant was not present and SDO was present. SDO submitted reply vide memo No dated stating that consumer has been billed upto units in the month of Nov.2017 and upto units in Jan On representation of consumer, record was checked and it was found that consumer has been billed for very low units in Sept and Nov. and for excessive high units in Jan Bill of consumer has been revised from to by giving benefit of slab and tariff. Now bill is absolutely correct and requested the forum to file complaint. He also placed on record the copy of revised bill. After going through the records and hearing the parties, the Forum finds that there is no merit in the complaint as bill of consumer has already been revised on Complaint is disposed off with no direction. Case is closed and parties to bear their own cost. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 15 th March (K.D. Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

255 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2066/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: Date of Order: Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: 1 K.D.Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman 2 Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of complaint of Smt. Sarabjeet Kaur Khurana, 44/First Floor, Surya Nagar Phase-II, Sector-91 Faridabad regarding non issue of bill V/s 1 XEN (OP) Divn. DHBVN, Greater Faridabad 2 SDO (OP) Sub Divn No., DHBVN, Tilpat.. Complainant/Petitioner Appearance:- For Complainant: Present.Respondents For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer CGRF Hisar. 2 Respondent SDO

256 ORDER Smt. Sarabjeet Kaur Khurana, 44/First Floor, Surya Nagar Phase-II, Sector-91, Faridabad has got an electricity connection bearing account No under (OP) Sub- Division, DHBVN, Tilpat hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. The complainant has filed the present complaint stating therein that her connection was released in July-2017 and first bill has not been generated till now ever after passage of 7 months. No reading has been taken since then. She requested the Forum to get her complaint redressed. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Faridabad for hearing of the case. The proceedings of the case held at Faridabad on The complainant and SDO were present. SDO submitted reply vide memo No dated stating that account of complainant was updated on system in the month f Jan First bill of this consumer has been generated and sent to consumer through MRBD agency and on mobile number. He further assured that now onwards the complainant will get the bill in time. Copy of bill was also handed over to consumer during hearing. After going through the records and hearing the parties, the Forum finds that complaint has already been redressed and decided to dispose of the complainant in view reply submitted by SDO. Case is closed and parties to bear their own cost. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 15 th March (K.D. Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

257 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2068/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: Date of Order: Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: 1 K.D.Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman 2 Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of complaint of Sh Rama Kant, D-112 Om Enclave Part-II, near Agawanpur village Faridabad regarding wrong billing V/s 1 XEN (OP) Divn. DHBVN, Greater Faridabad 2 SDO (OP) Sub Divn No., DHBVN, Tilpat.. Complainant/Petitioner Appearance:- For Complainant: None.Respondents For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer CGRF Hisar. 2 Respondent SDO

258 ORDER Sh Rama Kant, D-112 Om Enclave Part-II, near Agawanpur village, Faridabad has got an electricity connection bearing account No under (OP) Sub-Division, DHBVN, Tilpat hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. The complainant has filed the present complaint stating therein that he got bill on provisional basis during Feb.2018 and got it rectified on at local SDO office and paid the same at cash counter but till date his payment has not been updated and online system is showing outstanding amount against him. He requested the Forum to get her complaint redressed. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Faridabad for hearing of the case. The proceedings of the case held at Faridabad on The complainant was not present and SDO was present. SDO submitted reply vide memo No dated stating that billing of consumer has been corrected and same has been updated on the system. After going through the records and hearing the parties, the Forum finds that complaint has already been redressed and decided to dispose of the complainant in view reply submitted by SDO. Case is closed and parties to bear their own cost. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 15 th March (K.D. Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

259 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2067/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: Date of Order: Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: 1 K.D.Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman 2 Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of complaint of Sh Chander Shekar Joshi, c/o Ram Chander Joshi C-124 SD Vihar, near Fauji Hardware, Surajkund Faridabad regarding wrong billing V/s.. Complainant/Petitioner 1 XEN (OP) Divn. DHBVN, Old Faridabad 2 SDO (OP) Sub Divn Mathura Road DHBVN, Tilpat Appearance:- For Complainant: None.Respondents For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer CGRF Hisar. 2 Respondent SDO

260 ORDER Sh Chander Shekar Joshi, c/o Ram Chander Joshi C-124 SD Vihar, near Fauji Hardware, Surajkund Faridabad has got an electricity connection bearing account No under (OP) Sub-Division, DHBVN, Mathura Road, Faridabad hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. The complainant has filed the present complaint stating therein that his bill has been raised by miscalculation. He requested the Forum to get his complaint redressed. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Faridabad for hearing of the case. The proceedings of the case held at Faridabad on The complainant was not present and SDO was present. SDO submitted reply vide memo No dated stating that billing of consumer is correct as per consumption recorded in meter during bimonthly cycle. There is no abnormality in the bill raised to consumer and he requested to file the complaint. Neither the consumer nor his representative was present to explain his case. After going through the records and hearing the parties, the Forum finds no merit in the complaint and bills are raised correctly and no abnormality in the bill and decided to dispose of the complainant in view reply submitted by SDO. Case is closed and parties to bear their own cost. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 15 th March (K.D. Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

261 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2069/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: Date of Order: Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: 1 K.D.Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman 2 Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of complaint of M/S HM Web House Pvt Ltd B-102 Sanjay Colony behind Sector-23 NIT Faridabad regarding non availability of power supply V/s 1 XEN (OP) Divn. DHBVN, NIT Faridabad 2 SDO (OP) Sub Divn No.3 DHBVN, Faridabad.. Complainant/Petitioner Appearance:- For Complainant: Present.Respondents For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer CGRF Hisar. 2 Representative of Respondent SDO

262 ORDER M/S HM Web House Pvt Ltd B-102 Sanjay Colony behind Sector-23 NIT Faridabad has got an electricity connection bearing account No under (OP) Sub-Division, DHBVN No.3, Faridabad hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. The complainant has filed the present complaint stating therein that they are one of the eminent manufacturer and exported of web off set printing machine and they have to supply the material to the export units in a time bound manner and since last 2-3 months there is shortage of power supply in the area and supply is being switched off from 9.00 am to 5.00 pm without any reason and without informing to them. They requested to redress the complaint. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Faridabad for hearing of the case. The proceedings of the case held at Faridabad on The complainant and representative of SDO were present. SDO submitted reply vide memo No dated stating that connection of consumer is running through 11 KV Sanjay colony feeder as per CM announcement RMC road has to be constructed along Majesar Gochi drain form Thermal power house to Sohna Ropad. So for the shifting of HT/LT line the work has been started during the month of Jan.2018 and to do the shifting work 11 KV Sanjay colony feeder had to be shut down. He further submitted that on the request orf consumer his office did not take any permit for 7-8 days in the month of Feb, As the work is monitored by Govt level and there is pressure of management to comp-laete the work and they have to take permit on line. Consumer as present who stated that line is switched off without any planning and after switching of the supply material is shifted at site and even work is carried out which require no interference with supply. He requested the form to direct the Licensee to supply at least 4 days in a week and during other days supply be switched off only after arranging the proper man and material at site for minimum duration that too after informing the consumer. After going through the records and hearing the parties, the Forum finds merits in the contention of consumer and he cannot be compelled to remain without supply for days together and License should plan work in advance and supply and switched off only men and material are shifted at site and they are ready to carry out the work. The forum therefore decides and directs the Licensee that there should not be more than 3 days permit in a week and that too after proper planning and shifting of men and material at site. Case is closed and parties to bear their own cost.

263 File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 15 th March (K.D. Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

264 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2070/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: Date of Order: Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: 1 K.D.Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman 2 Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of complaint of Sh Jitender Sehwag, AQ-06/FF BPTP Park Land, Sector-81 Faridabad regarding refund of security V/s 1 XEN (OP) Divn. DHBVN, Old Faridabad 2 SDO (OP) Sub Divn No.4 DHBVN, Faridabad.. Complainant/Petitioner Appearance:- For Complainant: Present.Respondents For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer CGRF Hisar. 2 Respondent SDO

265 ORDER M Sh Jitender Sehwag, AQ-06/FF BPTP Park Land, Sector-81Faridabad has got an electricity connection bearing account No under (OP) Sub-Division, DHBVN No.4, Faridabad hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. The complainant has filed the present complaint stating therein that he was having a electricity connection with DHBVN till 8/2017. He got same disconnected and paid all the dues to DHBVN. He further submitted that an amount of Rs deposited by him in the form of security is lying with DHBVN and he has lost the security receipt and DHBVN is not refunding the amount on one pretext or other. He requested to redress the complaint. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Faridabad for hearing of the case. The proceedings of the case held at Faridabad on The complainant and SDO were present. Consumer argued the case in line with written submission and requested to refund him security deposited with DHBVN. SDO was present who submitted that he did not receive the complaint so reply could not be prepared by him. On enquiry it was found that complaint was forwarded to SDO S/D No.3 inadvertently by Nodal officer. Consumer argued that he is a govt. Employee and cannot visit so frequently after taking leave. SDO stated that in the absence of original receipt of security the complainant shall submit the Affidavit regarding non claiming of ACD afterwards. Complainant contested and stated that as per direction of government no person can be asked for Affidavit. After going through the records and hearing the parties, the Forum decides that complainant will submit an undertaking alongwith his self attested ID giving the facts ad undertake regarding non claiming of ACD is original receipt is traced later on. SDO will check his record (Service connection register, A&A form and security register) and refund the security to the consumer through cheque/dd /RTGS within a one months time if the respondent fail to refund the security within stipulated period, the security may be refunded alongwith applicable interest from the date of order to the date of payment. Case is closed and parties to bear their own cost. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 15 th March (K.D. Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

266 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2074/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: Date of Order: Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: 1 K.D.Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman 2 Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member wrong billing In the matter of complaint of Sh Gopal Krishan C-35/11 DLF Faridabad regarding V/s 1 XEN (OP) Divn. DHBVN, Old Faridabad 2 SDO (OP) Sub Divn East DHBVN, Faridabad.. Complainant/Petitioner Appearance:- For Complainant: Present.Respondents For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer CGRF Hisar. 2 Respondent SDO

267 ORDER Sh Gopal Krishan C-35/11 DLF Faridabad has got an electricity connection bearing account No under (OP) Sub-Division, DHBVN East, Faridabad hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. The complainant has filed the present complaint stating therein that his connection was disconnected during 1/2017 due to defaulting amount. He has to pay Rs at that time but due to heart problem he could not make the payment. His meter has been removed during Jan.2017 but till date bills are raised to him on average basis. He requested to redress the complaint. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Faridabad for hearing of the case. The proceedings of the case held at Faridabad on The complainant and SDO were present. Consumer argued the case in line with written submission and requested to correct his bill. SDO submitted reply vide No. 935 dated stating therein that meter of complainant was removed in the month of 1/2017 and PDCO was not entered in the consumer account resulting in raising bill on average basis. He further submitted that now PDCO has been entered in the system. Bill has been corrected and net amount payable by consumer is Rs He placed on record a copy of duplicate bill after refund the amount. Copy of reply alongwith duplicate bill was handed over to consumer and he was satisfied with the reply submitted by SDO. After going through the records and hearing the parties, the Forum finds that complainant has already been redressed and he is satisfied with the resolution so forum decides to dispose of the complaint with no direction. Case is closed and parties to bear their own cost. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 15 th March (K.D. Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

268 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2075/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: Date of Order: Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: 1 K.D.Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman 2 Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of complaint of Smt Babita w/o Udai Kumar, 279/Second floor, Ashoka Enclave, Sector-35 Faridabad regarding wrong billing V/s.. Complainant/Petitioner 1 XEN (OP) Divn. DHBVN, Old Faridabad 2 SDO (OP) Sub Divn Mathura Road DHBVN, Faridabad Appearance:- For Complainant: None.Respondents For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer CGRF Hisar. 2 Respondent SDO

269 ORDER Smt Babita w/o Udai Kumar, 279/Second floor, Ashoka Enclave, Sector-35 Faridabad has got an electricity connection bearing account No under (OP) Sub-Division, DHBVN MR, Faridabad hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. The complainant has filed the present complaint stating therein that DHBVN is generating electricity bill without any meter reading or physical verification in an arbitrary manner. Her bill is raised without reading and resulting in excess bill. She requested to redress the complaint. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Faridabad for hearing of the case. The proceedings of the case held at Faridabad on The complainant was not present and SDO was present. SDO submitted reply vide No dated stating therein that billing of consumer has been corrected and consumer is satisfied now. He also placed on record the copy of satisfaction report given by consumer. After going through the records and hearing the parties, the Forum finds that complainant has already been redressed and she is satisfied with the resolution so forum decides to dispose of the complaint with no direction. Case is closed and parties to bear their own cost. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 15 th March (K.D. Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

270 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2080/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: Date of Order: Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: 1 K.D.Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman 2 Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of complaint of Smt Om Ratti Yadva, HN 8 Gali No.13 D-II, Sanjay Colony Sector-23 Faridabad regarding wrong billing V/s 1 XEN (OP) Divn. DHBVN, Old Faridabad 2 SDO (OP) Sub Divn No.3 DHBVN, Faridabad.. Complainant/Petitioner Appearance:- For Complainant: Representative.Respondents For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer CGRF Hisar. 2 Representative of Respondent SDO

271 ORDER Smt Om Ratti Yadva, HN 8 Gali No.13 D-II, Sanjay Colony Sector-23 Faridabad has got an electricity connection bearing account No under (OP) Sub-Division, DHBVN No.3, Faridabad hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. The complainant has filed the present complaint stating therein that her meter is running in OK condition. Present meter reading is 760 units whereas she was billed on provisional basis from June-16 to Jan.18. She further submitted that bill to her sent on MMC basis whereas her consumption is very low. She requested to Forum that since her meter is running OK so MMC is not applicable in her case so excess amount charged of Rs may be refunded to her. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Faridabad for hearing of the case. The proceedings of the case held at Faridabad on The complainant and SDO were present. SDO submitted reply vide No dated stating therein that consumer has been billed correctly as per consumption recorded/mmc basis. She is charged as per instructions of HERC and Licensee and there is no dispute on the bill raised t consumer and she is rightly billed on MMC basis. Consumer argued that she should not be raised billed on MMC basis as her consumptikon is very low. SDO advised the complainant to get the load reduced if she feels that MMC is more than consumption. After going through the records and hearing the parties, the Forum finds no merit in the complaint as consumer is rightly chargeable either on MMC or units consumer whichever is higher as per existing HERC regulations. Forum decides to dispose of the complaint without any direction. Case is closed and parties to bear their own cost. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 15 th March (K.D. Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

272 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2080/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: Date of Order: Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: 1 K.D.Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman 2 Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of complaint of Smt Om Ratti Yadva, HN 8 Gali No.13 D-II, Sanjay Colony Sector-23 Faridabad regarding wrong billing V/s 1 XEN (OP) Divn. DHBVN, Old Faridabad 2 SDO (OP) Sub Divn No.3 DHBVN, Faridabad.. Complainant/Petitioner Appearance:- For Complainant: Representative.Respondents For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer CGRF Hisar. 2 Representative of Respondent SDO

273 ORDER Smt Om Ratti Yadva, HN 8 Gali No.13 D-II, Sanjay Colony Sector-23 Faridabad has got an electricity connection bearing account No under (OP) Sub-Division, DHBVN No.3, Faridabad hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. The complainant has filed the present complaint stating therein that her meter is running in OK condition. Present meter reading is 760 units whereas she was billed on provisional basis from June-16 to Jan.18. She further submitted that bill to her sent on MMC basis whereas her consumption is very low. She requested to Forum that since her meter is running OK so MMC is not applicable in her case so excess amount charged of Rs may be refunded to her. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Faridabad for hearing of the case. The proceedings of the case held at Faridabad on The complainant and SDO were present. SDO submitted reply vide No dated stating therein that consumer has been billed correctly as per consumption recorded/mmc basis. She is charged as per instructions of HERC and Licensee and there is no dispute on the bill raised t consumer and she is rightly billed on MMC basis. Consumer argued that she should not be raised billed on MMC basis as her consumption is very low. SDO advised the complainant to get the load reduced if she feels that MMC is more than consumption. After going through the records and hearing the parties, the Forum finds no merit in the complaint as consumer is rightly chargeable either on MMC or units consumer whichever is higher as per existing HERC regulations. Forum decides to dispose of the complaint without any direction. Case is closed and parties to bear their own cost. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 15 th March (K.D. Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

274 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2082/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: Date of Order: Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: 1 K.D.Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman 2 Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member regarding wrong billing In the matter of complaint of Smt Sushila, E-70/3 Pull Pehladpur New Delhi V/s 1 XEN (OP) Divn. DHBVN, Gr. Faridabad 2 SDO (OP) Sub Divn DHBVN, Tilpat.. Complainant/Petitioner Appearance:- For Complainant: Representative.Respondents For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer CGRF Hisar. 2 Respondent SDO

275 ORDER Smt Sushila, E-70/3 Pull Pehladpur New Delhi has got an electricity connection bearing account No under (OP) Sub-Division, DHBVN Tilpat hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. The complainant has filed the present complaint stating therein that she has been charged incorrectly for surcharge against her account. She further stated that she was issued a wrong bill during 12/2016 and made a complaint and her bill was corrected but surcharge levied on wrong bill was not refunded to her. She requested to redress complaint. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Faridabad for hearing of the case. The proceedings of the case held at Faridabad on The representative of complainant and SDO were present. SDO submitted reply vide No dated stating therein that consumer got wrong elecy bill during 12/16. Consumer approached S/D office and bill was corrected in same month and as such no surcharge was levied against consumer as bill was corrected. Consumer did not pay the amount since 12/16 till date and surcharged levied against her for non payment of bill is rightly chargeable and requested the Forum to file complaint. Complainant argued the case and stated that in the month of 8/18 the bill raised to her shows a surcharge of Rs out of total outstanding amount of Rs which is not possible in one year of non payment. She requested the Forum to get the detail verified from SDO. SDO submitted supplementary reply on stating therein that wrong bill to the consumer was issued on with due date as On representation of the complainant bill was corrected and due date was extended to Since the bill was corrected in the same month and due date was extended so possibility of levy surcharge on incorrect amount is zero. He also submitted that consumer is defaulter and not making the payment since 2013 and surcharge levy on the bill is correct. He requested the Forum to file the complaint. After going through the records and hearing the parties, the Forum finds no merit in the complaint of consumer as his bill was corrected in the same month and due date for payment was extended so there is no levy of surcharge on the incorrect amount. Forum also observed that consumer is not making payment since 2013 and has not come to Forum with clean hands

276 and therefore decides to dispose of complaint with no direction. Case is closed and parties to bear their own cost. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 15 th March (K.D. Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

277 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2094/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: Date of Order: Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: 1 K.D.Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman 2 Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of complaint of Sh Satish Garg, 174/3 Friends Colony, Parvesh Marg, Railway Road Faridabad regarding wrong charging of reading V/s 1 XEN (OP) Divn. DHBVN, Old Faridabad 2 SDO (OP) Sub Divn (W) DHBVN, Faridabad.. Complainant/Petitioner Appearance:- For Complainant: Present.Respondents For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer CGRF Hisar. 2 Respondent SDO

278 ORDER Sh Satish Garg, 174/3 Friends Colony, Parvesh Marg, Railway Road Faridabad has got an electricity connection bearing account No under (OP) Sub-Division, DHBVN West, Faridabad hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. The complainant has filed the present complaint stating therein that meter at his premises is installed outside. On MR reported that his meter has become dead stop. After information by MR, he raised a complaint with DHBVN on His meter was replaced and sent to Lab for checking. During checking, his meter seals were found OK and meter was reported to be slow. On being asked regarding the slowness of meter, it was replied that they can not provide the date of slowness. He was charged Rs after 3 months and threaten to disconnect supply on non payment. He further submitted that since seals provided on meter are OK and there is no tampering in meter so he cannot be held responsible. He further submitted that as per sales manual he should be charged for 6 months but excess amount has been charged from him. He requested to redress complaint. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Faridabad for hearing of the case. The proceedings of the case held at Faridabad on The complainant and SDO were present. SDO submitted reply vide No. 222 dated stating therein that elecy meter of consumer was sent to Lab on Meter was got tested in Lab and report was submitted vide No.1696 dated As per report accuracy of meter was found slow by %. On the lab report an amount of rs has been charged to consumer for a period of one year and amount charged t consumer is correct as per instructions and notice has been served to consumer. Consumer was present who argued the case in line with written submission and also placed on record a copy of instruction 6.7 and 4.15 of Licensee where the adjustment to be carried out in consumer account shall not excess 6 months. SDO contested the argument of consumer and stated that instructions put by consumer on record relates to 2013 and HERC vide Reg. issued during 2016 has withdrawn the time limitation. After going through the records and hearing the parties, the Forum finds no merit in the complaint of consumer and decides to dispose of complaint with the direction that bill raised to consumer may be accepted in two monthly installments without levy of surcharge on balance amount. Case is closed and parties to bear their own cost. As required under Haryana State Electricity Regulatory Commission (Guidelines for establishment of Forum for Redressal of Grievances of consumers, Electricity Ombudsman and

279 Consumer Advocacy) Regulations-2016, the implementation of this decision may be intimated to this office within 30 days from the date of its receipt. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 15 th March (K.D. Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

280 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2076/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: Date of Order: Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: 1. K D Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman 2 Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of complaint of Sh. Arvind Bhargava, H.N. 2923, Sector-46, near Amity Global School Gurgaon regarding wrong billing. V/s.. Complainant/Petitioner 1 Xen (OP) Division, DHBVN, Gurgaon 2 SDO (OP) South City S/Divn. DHBVN, Gurgaon.Respondents Appearance:- For Complainant: Present For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer/CGRF, DHBVN, Hisar 2 Representative of respondent SDO

281 ORDER Sh. Arvind Bhargava, HN 2923, Sector-46, near Amity Global School Gurgaon got an electricity connection bearing account No under SDO (OP) South City S/D DHBVN, Gurgaon, hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. The complainant has filed the present complaint stating therein that. Bill for the period of 12/11/2017 to 13/1/2018 has been raised for consumed unit of Correct rate has not been charged to him. He requested the forum to redress his complaint. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Gurugram for hearing of the case. Proceedings were held on The complainant and representative of respondent SDO were present. SDO submitted reply vide memo No.2230 dated stating that consumer that bill to the consumer has been raised as per instructions of the Nigam. The slab rate charged to consumer is correct. Consumer was present who stated that bill issued on 25/1/2018 has been raised showing the billed unit as where as units in his meter on is He requested the forum to get the meter checked and raised the bill as per actual consumption and slab rate. After going through the record available in the file and hearing the parties, the Forum decides to dispose off the complaint with the direction that meter of complainant may be checked today and bill may be raised accordingly. Case is closed. No cost on either side. As required under Haryana State Electricity Regulatory Commission (Guidelines for establishment of Forum for Redressal of Grievances of consumers, Electricity Ombudsman and Consumer Advocacy) Regulations-2016, the implementation of this decision may be intimated to this office within 30 days from the date of its receipt. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 27 th March, (K.D. Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

282 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2077/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: Date of Order: Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: 1. K D Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman 2 Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member regarding wrong billing In the matter of complaint of Smt. Archna Gupta, D-1994, Palam Vihar, Gurgaon. V/s.. Complainant/Petitioner 1 Xen (OP) Division, DHBVN, Gurgaon 2 SDO (OP) Maruti S/Divn. DHBVN, Gurgaon.Respondents Appearance:- For Complainant: None For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer/CGRF, DHBVN, Hisar 2 None for respondent SDO

283 ORDER Smt. Archna Gupta, D-1994, Palam Vihar,Gurgaon got an electricity connection bearing account No under SDO (OP) Maruti S/D DHBVN, Gurgaon, hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. The complainant has filed the present complaint stating therein that a wrong bill has been raised to her amounting to Rs.14308/ these charged are viewed in every bill since last 1 and half year or so. She requested the forum to redress her complaint. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Gurugram for hearing of the case. Proceedings were held on Neither complainant nor representatives of respondent SDO were present. However, SDO submitted reply vide memo No dated stating that bill of consumer has been rectified vide SC&AR No. 482/1-R for Rs and no complaint of complainant is pending. After going through the record available in the file and hearing the parties, the Forum decides to dispose off the complaint with no direction as grievances of the complainant has been redressed Case is closed. No cost on either side. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 27 th March, (K.D. Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

284 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2083/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: Date of Order: Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: 1. K D Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman 2 Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of complaint of Sh. Sushil Kumar Aggarwal, H-1102, Park View City-1, Sohna Road, Gurgaon regarding wrong billing. V/s.. Complainant/Petitioner 1 Xen (OP) Division, DHBVN, Sohna 2 SDO (OP) Sohna Road S/Divn. DHBVN, Gurgaon.Respondents Appearance:- For Complainant: None For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer/CGRF, DHBVN, Hisar 2 Representative of respondent SDO

285 ORDER Sh. Sushil Kumar Aggarwal, H-1102, Park View City-1, Sohna Road, Gurgaon got an electricity connection bearing account No under SDO (OP) Sohna Road S/D DHBVN, Gurgaon, hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. The complainant has filed the present complaint stating therein that incorrect reading have been recorded by the meter reader in the bill. He has requested the forum to redress his complaint. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Gurugram for hearing of the case. The proceedings were held on The complainant was not present but representative of respondent SDO was present. SDO submitted reply vide memo No.nill dated nill stating that incorrect bill was raised to the consumer due to premises locked. Now bill has been correct and complainant has given his satisfaction report through mail. After going through the record available in the file and hearing the parties, the Forum decides to dispose off the complaint as grievances of the consumer have been redressed. Case is closed. No cost on either side. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 27 th March, (K.D. Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

286 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2084/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: Date of Order: Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: 1. K D Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman 2 Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member wrong billing In the matter of complaint of Sh. Dinesh Kumar 1206/1, 12 Floor, Gurgaon regarding... Complainant/Petitioner V/s 1 Xen (OP) Division, DHBVN, Gurgaon 2 SDO (OP) South City S/Divn. DHBVN, Gurgaon.Respondents Appearance:- For Complainant: None For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer/CGRF, DHBVN, Hisar 2 Representative of respondent SDO

287 ORDER Sh. Dinesh Kumar 1206/1, 12 Floor,, Gurgaon got an electricity connection bearing account No under SDO (OP) South City S/D DHBVN, jurisdiction to hear the complaint. Gurgaon, hence this Forum has The complainant has filed the present complaint stating therein that is meter was replace and final has been shown as instead of He requested forum to redress his complaint. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Gurugram for hearing of the case. Proceeding were held on The complainant was not present but representative of respondent SDO was present. SDO submitted reply vide memo No dated stating that bill of consumer has been correct vide SC&AR No. 135/R/21 and refund of Rs has been given to the consumer. Consumer submitted satisfaction report through mail. After going through the record available in the file and hearing the parties, the Forum decides to dispose off the complaint as complaint of complainant has been redressed. Case is closed. No cost on either side. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 27 th March, (K.D. Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

288 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2095/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: Date of Order: Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: 1. K D Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman 2 Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member regarding wrong billing In the matter of complaint of Sh. Anil Kumar Gupta, 19/970, Lodhi Colony New Delhi. V/s 1 Xen (OP) Division, DHBVN, Gurgaon 2 SDO (OP) DLF S/Divn. DHBVN, Gurgaon.. Complainant/Petitioner.Respondents Appearance:- For Complainant: Present For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer/CGRF, DHBVN, Hisar 2 None from respondent SDO

289 ORDER Sh. Anil Kumar Gupta, 19/970, Lodhi Colony New Delhi got an electricity connection bearing account No under SDO (OP) DLF S/D DHBVN, Gurgaon, hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. The complainant has filed the present complaint stating therein that average bill has been raised for the period 17/10/2017 to 18/12/2018 for usage of 2844 unit. He further submitted that average charged is on higher side as unit consumed during month of December 2015 & 2016 are very low. He requested the forum to charged unit on corresponding month basis. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Gurugram for hearing of the case. Proceedings were held on The complainant was present but representative of respondent SDO was not present. No reply was submitted by the respondent SDO. Nodal officer was present, who was a mere spectator during the hearing. No arguments were advanced by Nodal officer. After going through the record available in the file and hearing the parties, the Forum decides to dispose off the complaint with the direction that average the consumer may be charged on corresponding month basis. He may be charged for average unit billed during December Case is closed. No cost on either side. As required under Haryana State Electricity Regulatory Commission (Guidelines for establishment of Forum for Redressal of Grievances of consumers, Electricity Ombudsman and Consumer Advocacy) Regulations-2016, the implementation of this decision may be intimated to this office within 30 days from the date of its receipt. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 27 th March, (K.D. Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

290 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2103/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: Date of Order: Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: 1. K D Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman 2 Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member regarding metering In the matter of complaint of M/S Airtel Ltd, Building No.10-B DLF City Gurgaon. V/s 1 Xen (OP) Division, DHBVN, Manesar 2 SDO (OP) DLF S/Divn. DHBVN, Manesar.. Complainant/Petitioner.Respondents Appearance:- For Complainant: None For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer/CGRF, DHBVN, Hisar 2 None for respondent SDO

291 ORDER M/S Airtel Ltd, Building No.10-B DLF City Gurgaon got an electricity connection bearing account No. AFDS-006 under SDO (OP) S/D DHBVN, Manesar, hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. The complainant has filed the present complaint stating therein that. Wrong bill amounting to Rs has been raised to them for the month of feb He further submitted that wrong arrear has been shown in the bill where as they have made earlier payments. He has requested the forum to redress his complaint. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Gurugram for hearing of the case. Proceedings were held on Neither the complainant nor representatives of respondent SDO were present. However, SDO submitted reply vide memo No dated stating that wrong bill was issued to the consumer during the month of 10/2017, now the bill has been corrected vide SC&AR No 1249/93/R Amounting to Rs After going through the record available in the file and hearing the parties, the Forum decides to dispose off the complaint with no direction as complaint of the complainant has already been redressed. Case is closed. No cost on either side. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 27 th March, (K.D. Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

292 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2033/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing & Dated of Order Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: 1 K.D.Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman 2 Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of Sh. Jai Dev s/o Sh. Ram Partap V&PO Dhansu, Hisar regarding 24 hours supply in Dhanis. V/s.. Complainant/Petitioner Appearance:- For Complainant: For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer CGRF Hisar 2 Respondent SDO XEN (OP) Divn.No.1 DHBVN, Hisar SDO (OP) City S/D DHBVN, Satrod Present.Respondents

293 ORDER Sh. Jai Dev s/o Sh. Ram Partap V&PO Dhansu, Hisar has got an electricity connection bearing account No under (OP) City Sub Divn. Hisar hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. The complainant has filed present complaint stating therein that from the last 3 months supply in their residences has been reduced to 8 hours since last 3 months. They are resident of Govt. colony area under SDO/City Hisar. Their area falls within municipality limit still they are being fed from AP feeder. The complainant requested for redressal his grievances. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Hisar for hearing of the case. The proceedings held at Hisar on The complainant was not present and SDO(OP) City who submitted written reply filed vide No 2117 dated stating therein that existing RDS feeder has been converted into AP feeder and accordingly the supply is provided for 8 hours. He further submitted that consumer has to deposit cost for shifting their Dhanis from AP feeder to RDS feeder. On being enquiry, he could not reply regarding the area falling within municipality limit and instructions of Licensee on the issue. He requested for another date to submit his detailed reply. Request granted. Now to come on next date i.e Proceedings were held at Hisar on The complainant and respondent SDO were present. SDO stated that the area of the complainant was checked personally and area falls in the extended municipality limit in fields. There are agriculture as well as domestic consumers in the area. Consumers were being fed from 11 KV Vinod Nagar Urban feeder. During March2017 a plan was made to bifurcate the urban area from tubewell area an estimate amounting to Rs lacs was got sanctioned. The area of city was bifurcated as per the instructions of Licensee. Consumer argued that supply to their premises were being fed from urban feeder since last years and shifting of supply from urban feeder at this stage is injustice to them. He also submitted that they are charged MC tax & thus entitle for urban supply. SDO submitted that consumer can be fed from urban area if they comply with the instructions of the licensee and deposit the amount involved in shifting the connection to urban feeder. He stressed upon that the MC tax is collected by Licensee on behalf of municipality if any facility is to be provided regarding extension of supply it should be deposited either by municipality or by the consumer. Supply can be shifted only in compliance of instruction of Licensee. After going through the record available on file and hearing the parties the Forum agrees with the contention of respondent SDO and therefore decides to dispose of the complaint with no direction. Case is closed. Party to bear their own cost. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 9 th March (K.D.Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

294 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2035/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing & Date of Order Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: 1 K.D.Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman 2 Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of Sh. Rai Sahab s/o Shankar Lal, VPO Talwandi Rana, Hisar regarding issue of bill after removal of meter. V/s.. Complainant/Petitioner Appearance:- For Complainant: For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer CGRF Hisar 2 Respondent SDO XEN (OP) Divn.No.1 DHBVN, Hisar SDO (OP) City S/D DHBVN, Satrod Present.Respondents

295 ORDER Sh. Rai Sahab s/o Shankar Lal, VPO Talwandi Rana, Hisar has got an electricity connection bearing account No. RT under (OP) City Sub Divn. Hisar hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. The complainant has filed present complaint stating therein that his meter was removed 3 to 4 years back and supply was disconnected permanently still bills are issued to him. The complainant requested for redressal his grievances. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Hisar for hearing of the case. The proceedings held at Hisar on The complainant and respondent SDO were present and no written reply was submitted by SDO(OP). He further submitted that he needs some time to trace out the old record of the Sub Divn and requested for another date Request granted. Now to come on next date i.e Proceedings were held at Hisar on Consumer and respondent SDO were present. SDO submitted reply vide memo NO.2481 dated stating therein that bill of said consumer has been corrected and a sum of Rs has been adjusted vide SC&AR No.619/96. He also put up on record copy of sundry and revised duplicate bill on record. Consumer was agreed with the reply submitted by the respondent SDO. After going through the record and hearing the parties, the Forum observed that the complaint of complainant has been redressed by Licensee and therefore decides to dispose of the complaint with no direction. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 9 th March (K.D.Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

296 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2050/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing & Date of Order Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: 1 K.D.Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman 2 Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member billing In the matter of Sh. Nafe Singh s/o Tara Chand, VPO Data, Hansi, Hisar regarding wrong V/s.. Complainant/Petitioner Appearance:- For Complainant: For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer CGRF Hisar 2 Respondent SDO XEN (OP) Divn. DHBVN, Hansi SDO (OP) S/U S/D DHBVN, Hansi Present.Respondents

297 ORDER Sh. Nafe Singh s/o Tara Chand, VPO Data, Hansi,, Hisar has got an electricity connection bearing account No. DT1D1000-A under (OP) S/U Sub Divn. Hansi hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. The complainant has filed present complaint stating therein that during the month of Nov.2017 a bil of Rs has been raised to him. The consumption recorded by meter for two months as He further stated that reading of his meter has jumped or meter reading has not recorded the reading properly. He requested to get his meter checked and redress his grievance. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Hisar for hearing of the case. The proceedings held at Hisar on The complainant was present and representative of respondent SDO was also present. SDO requested vide his memo No.215 dated for giving next date of hearing on the plea that he has joined recently and needs some time to investigate the matter. Consumer was present who argued that surcharge is being levied on his exaggerated bill and requested to settle the issue at the earliest. He also requested the Forum to get meter checking from Lab. Representative of SDO contended that if consumer is ready to deposit the testing fee, his meter will be got tested from the Lab. The forum asked the SDO to get the meter checked from the Lab and put up lab report on next date of hearing. Case is adjourned. Now to come on next date i.e Proceedings were held at Hisar on Consumer and respondent SDO were present. SDO submitted reply vide memo N.444/45 dated stating therein that the meter of the consumer has been checked by the M&T Lab Hisar and found working within permissible limit. No abnormality was observed while checking the meter in the Lab. He submitted that the higher reading recorded by meter is the result of accumulation of reading by meter reading agency. He also submitted on record the M&T report. Consumer was present who was satisfied with the checking of meter. However he further stated that bill was raised suddenly to the tune of Rs and he is not in a position to deposit bill in one lot. He requested the Forum to allow him to deposit the bill in installments with levy of surcharge. After going through the record and hearing the parties, the Forum observed that it is a case of accumulation of reading by meter reading agency and decides to dispose of the complaint with the direction that bill may be accepted in three equal bimonthly installments and no surcharge be levied from the date bill is raised to the consumer till the payment of the bills. If consumer defaults in payment of installments surcharge may be levied accordingly.

298 As required under Haryana State Electricity Regulatory Commission (Guidelines for establishment of Forum for Redressal of Grievances of consumers, Electricity Ombudsman and Consumer Advocacy) Regulations-2016, the implementation of this decision may be intimated to this office within 30 days from the date of its receipt. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 9 th March (K.D.Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

299 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2053/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing & Date of Order Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: 1 K.D.Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman 2 Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of Sh. Parveen Kumar s/o Subhash Chander, Umra Gate, Ganga Bagh near Mahendra Music Centre Hansi, Hisar regarding wrong billing V/s.. Complainant/Petitioner Appearance:- For Complainant: For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer CGRF Hisar 2 Respondent SDO XEN (OP) Divn. DHBVN, Hansi SDO (OP) S/D DHBVN, Hansi Present.Respondents

300 ORDER Sh. Parveen Kumar s/o Subhash Chander, Umra Gate, Ganga Bagh near Mahendra Music Centre Hansi Hisar has got an electricity connection bearing account No under (OP) Sub Divn. Hansi hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. The complainant has filed present complaint stating therein that he received a very high bill of Rs His meter was installed in 6/2017 and in 4 months bill of Rs has been raised which is not justified. He requested for redressal of grievance. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Hisar for hearing of the case. The proceedings held at Hisar on The complainant was present and representative of respondent SDO was also present. No written reply was filed by SDO stating that he received the complaint 2 days back and could not get time to submit the reply. The consumer was present wh stated that there is some problem in the meter as he called a pvt Electrician alongwith various size of capacitors and tried to maintain power factor by installing capacitor of difference size but he could maintain the power factor even with 6 KVA capacitor for load of 10.0 kw. The representative of SDO was asked by this Forum to depute a technical officer to understand the problem of the complainant and submit report alongwith written reply on next date of hearing. Meter may also be got checked from the lab during the period. Case is adjourned. Now to come on next date i.e Proceedings were held at Hisar on Consumer and respondent SDO were present. SDO submitted reply vide memo No. 329 dated stating therein that the consumer made a complaint regarding working of meter to his office and meter was checked by JE incharge of area. During checking no capacitor was found installed at consumer premises. Meter was also sent to Lab on the request of consumer during 12/2017 and working of meter was found within permissible limits. He further submitted that the site of the consumer was again checked by the JE incharge and found that consumer has installed a capacitor bank at his premises and now the recording of KVAH and KWH are comparable hence the bill charged as per reading recorded by the meter. He also placed on record the copy of Lab report, consumption data and statement of the JE incharge who visited the site. Consumer was present who stressed that there is a huge difference in KWH and KVAH reading recorded by the meter and this cannot be without the abnormality in the meter. He requested the Forum to get complaint redressed in his favour.

301 After going through the record and hearing the parties, the Forum observed that there is no reason to interfere with the billing dispose of consumer as meter working was found with permissible limit by Lab and consumer has not installed capacitor initially. The Forum decides to dispose of complaint with no merit. Case is closed and parties to bear their own cost. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 9 th March (K.D.Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

302 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2078/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing Date of Order Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: 1 K.D.Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman 2 Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of Sh. Satta Ram s/o Sh. Sakru Ram, r/o Surewala (Uklana) Hisar regarding wrong billing and reconnection V/s.. Complainant/Petitioner Appearance:- For Complainant: XEN (OP) Divn. DHBVN, Tohana SDO (OP) S/D DHBVN, Uklana.Respondents Representative For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer CGRF Hisar 2 Respondent SDO

303 ORDER Sh. Satta Ram s/o Sh. Sakru Ram, r/o Surewala (Uklana) Hisar has got an electricity connection bearing account No. SR1D-0789 under (OP) Sub Divn. Uklana hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. The complainant has filed present complaint stating therein that his connection was disconnected on defaulting amount one year back but still bill is raised to him. He requested the Forum to accept the amount in installments and reconnect the connection. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Hisar for hearing of the case. The proceedings held at Hisar on The representative of complainant and respondent SDO were present. The reply was filed by respondent SDO vide No.2188 dated stating therein that the connection of complinant was disconnected on due to defaulting amount outstanding against the consumer. PDCO was entered during 2/2017 and connection was shifted to disconnected ledger after levying surcharge of 6 months and an amount of Rs is outstanding as defaulting amount against the complainant. The bill of disconnected amount are sent to complainant for payment and no additional amount is added in his account. He placed on record the ledger copy of complainant from Feb,.2011 to date and copy of PDCO. Representative of consumer was present. She stated that defaulting amount may be accepted from him in instilments and supply may be restored. She further submitted that she may be allowed to installments of Rs alongwith current bill. After going through the record and hearing the parties, the Forum observed that complainant is not making the payment of defaulting amount since 2010 and even today she is not ready to make the payment. Therefore the Forum decides to dispose of the complaint with no direction as there is no merit in the complaint. Case is closed. Both the parties to bear their own cost. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 9 th March (K.D.Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

304 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2079/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing Dated of Order Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: 1 K.D.Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman 2 Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member connection In the matter of Sh. Amrish Kumar r/o Ward No.4, Barwala, Hisar regarding shifting of V/s.. Complainant/Petitioner Appearance:- For Complainant: For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer CGRF Hisar 2 Respondent SDO XEN (OP) Divn.No.1 DHBVN, Hisar SDO (OP) City S/D DHBVN, Hisar Present.Respondents

305 ORDER Sh. Amrish Kumar r/o Ward No.4, Barwala, Hisar has got an electricity connection bearing account No under (OP) City Sub Divn. Hisar hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. The complainant has filed present complaint stating therein that he has a domestic connection at his farm house since more than 10 years on domestic feeder. He further submitted that he is paying the bills without any delay since then but authorities have shifted his domestic connection on AP feeder after segregation of feeder. This is against law and equity of DHBVN segregation feeder from domestic to AP. The complainant requested for redressal his grievances. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Hisar for hearing of the case. The proceedings held at Hisar on The complainant and respondent SDO were present who did not submit written reply and submitted that due to late receipt of complaint he could not prepare the written reply. SDO stated that the area of the complainant was checked and area falls outside the municipality limit in fields. There are agriculture as well as domestic consumers in the area. Earlier consumers were being fed from 11 KV mixed feeder having domestic as well as agriculture connections. As per instructions of Licensee, the area of city was bifurcated. Consumer argued that supply to their premises were being fed from urban feeder since last years and shifting of supply from urban feeder at this stage is injustice to them. Consumer placed on record the copy of instructions of licensee regarding service connection. He submitted that as per instructions of licensee no cost is to be charged from him upto 150 meters so his connection be shifted on domestic feeder without levy of any charge. SDO submitted that the instructions supplied by complainant relates to new connection and service connection charges are to be deposited by applicant for release of connection upto 150 meters, the connection may be on AP feeder, domestic feeder or urban feeder so the plea of the complainant is not tenable. He requested to file the complaint. After going through the record available on file and hearing the parties the Forum agrees with the contention of respondent SDO and therefore decides to dispose of the complaint with no direction. Case is closed. Party to bear their own cost. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 9 th March (K.D.Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

306 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2081/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing Dated of Order Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: 1 K.D.Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman 2 Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of Sh. Anil Kumar House No Sector 16/17, Hisar regarding wrong billing V/s.. Complainant/Petitioner Appearance:- For Complainant: For the Respondent XEN (OP) Divn.No.1 DHBVN, Hisar SDO (OP) C/Line S/D DHBVN, Hisar Present 1 Nodal Officer CGRF Hisar 2 Representative of Respondent SDO.Respondents

307 ORDER Sh. Anil Kumar r/o 1798 Sector 16/17, Hisar has got an electricity connection bearing account No under (OP) C/L Sub Divn. Hisar hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. The complainant has filed present complaint stating therein that he has been charged excess bill through sundry whereas he is paying the bills regularly. The complainant requested for redressal his grievances. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Hisar for hearing of the case. The proceedings held at Hisar on The complainant and respondent SDO were present who submitted written reply vide No. Spl1 dated stating therein that an amount of Rs were charged wrongly as difference of ACD and service connection charges instead of Rs Now the difference of Rs again been charged to the consumer. Representative of consumer was present and detail of charging was explained to him. He was satisfied with the charged levied in his bill and submitted and submitted a satisfaction report. After going through the record available on file and hearing the parties the Forum decides to dispose of the complaint as complaint has already been 4redressed and consumer is satisfied with the reply by respondent SDO. Case is closed. Party to bear their own cost. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 9 th March (K.D.Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

308 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar Telephone No (website: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2056/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: Date of Order: Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: 1 K.D.Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman 2 Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of complaint of Sh. Ram Diya s/o Sh. Om Dutt, Bhiwani Road Aashram Basti, Bhagwati Wali Gali Jind regarding wrong billing V/s.. Complainant/Petitioner XEN (OP) DHBVN, Jind SDO (OP) D/U II DHBVN, Jind.Respondents Appearance:- For Complainant: None For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer CGRF Hisar 2 Representative of Respondent SDO

309 ORDER Sh. Ram Diya s/o Sh. Om Dutt, Bhiwani Road Aashram Basti, Bhagwati Wali Gali Jind has got an electricity connection bearing account No under (OP) S/U II Jind has made a complaint and hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint The complainant has filed the present complaint stating therein that the reading recorded by the meter on was 3981 units whereas he has been billed for a consumption of 625 units which is wrong. He requested to get his complaint redressed. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Hisar for hearing of the case. The proceedings held at Hisar on The complainant was not present and representative of respondent SDO was present. The respondent SDO filed written reply vide no dated stating therein that the bill was raised provisionally due to non recording of reading by the MRBD firm and now same has been got verified and revised bill has been issued to complainant as per actual reading recorded by the meter. After going through the record on file and hearing the party, the Forum finds that complaint of complainant has been redressed and therefore to dispose of the complaint in view of written reply of SDO.. The case is closed. Both the parties to bear their own cost. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 9 th March, (K.D.Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

310 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2099/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: Date of Order : Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: K.D Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of complaint of Sh. Yoginder Kumar s/o Umed Singh, Village Khyra, PO Khatod (Mohindergarh) regarding change of name V/s.. Complainant/Petitioner XEN (OP) DHBVN Mohindergarh SDO (OP)City S/Divn DHBVN Mohindergarh Appearance:-.Respondents For Complainant: Present For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer CGRF DHBVN Hisar. 2 Respondent SDO

311 ORDER Sh. Yoginder Kumar s/o Umed Singh, Village Khyra, PO Khatod (Mohindergarh) has got an electricity connection bearing account No. CP under SDO, City Sub Divn. DHBVN Mohindergarh hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. He filed the present complaint stating that a connection is existing in the name of his father. During the partition tubewell connection has come in his share whereas connection of house has gone to share of his brother. He has paid outstanding amount against this tubewell connection. He also submitted that partition of their land has been done by Revenue authorities and requested to change the name of tubewell connection to his name. He requested the Forum to redress his grievance. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Narnaul for hearing of the case. The proceedings held at Narnaul on The complainant and respondent SDO were present. The consumer argued his case in line with written submission. The SDO submitted written reply vide memo No dated stating therein that tubewell is existing in the name of father of complainant and if complainant wants to get connection transferred in his name he should submit documentary evidence for trhe same. Consumer argued that his father as well as his brother has given no objection certificate on Affidavit. He also submitted that Licensee is corresponding with him regarding payment of defaulting amount since last more than 2-3 years but connection is not changed in his name. He also placed the copy of Affidavit and correspondence made by Licensee. SDO submitted that one more domestic connection is existing in the name of Umed Singh who is defaulter of licensee. Consumer contested that domestic connection is used by his brother and he has also filed court case regarding that connection. After considering facts of the case and hearing the parties, the Forum decides to dispose of complaint with the direction that an Indemnity Bond regarding defaulting amount of domestic connection and regarding any dispute for tubewell connection may be obtained from the complainant and change of name may be effected thereafter. Case is closed. No cost on either side. As required under Haryana State Electricity Regulatory Commission (Guidelines for establishment of Forum for Redressal of Grievances of consumers, Electricity Ombudsman and Consumer Advocacy) Regulations-2016, the implementation of this decision may be intimated to this office within 30 days from the date of its receipt. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 20 th March, (K.D.Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

312 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2085/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: Date of Order : Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: K.D Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of complaint of Sh. Hari Singh Yadav s/o Panna Lal, Village Mandalana, Tehsil Narnaul (Mohindergarh) regarding release of tubewell connection V/s.. Complainant/Petitioner XEN (OP) DHBVN Narnaul SDO (OP) S/U S/Divn DHBVN Narnaul Appearance:-.Respondents For Complainant: Present For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer CGRF DHBVN Hisar. 2 Respondent SDO

313 ORDER Sh. Hari Singh Yadav s/o Panna Lal, Village Mandalana, Tehsil Narnaul (Mohindergarh) has applied for an electricity connection for tubewell under SDO, OP S/U Sub Divn. DHBVN Narnaul hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. He filed the present complaint stating that he applied for tubewell connection on by depositing a sum of Rs No connection has been released till date even after passing of 21 years. He did not receive any demand notice nor any intimation regarding cancellation of application. He submitted that no Nigam is saying that application has been cancelled just to avoid delay in releasing of connections. He requested the Forum to redress his grievance. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Narnaul for hearing of the case. The proceedings held at Narnaul on The complainant and respondent SDO were present. The consumer argued his case in line with written submission. The SDO submitted that due to late receipt of complaint he could not prepare written reply. However he stated that application of complainant stands cancelled on He also put up the service connection register showing cancellation of application duly signed by the then SDO. Consumer stressed that amount deposited by him should be refunded alongwith interest if Nigam is not in a position to release the connection or connection should be released immediately. After considering facts of the case and hearing the parties, the Forum finds that the there is no merit in the complaint hence Forum decides to dispose of complaint with the direction that security of the complainant may be refunded alongwith interest payable on saving account by Bank. Case is closed. No cost on either side. As required under Haryana State Electricity Regulatory Commission (Guidelines for establishment of Forum for Redressal of Grievances of consumers, Electricity Ombudsman and Consumer Advocacy) Regulations-2016, the implementation of this decision may be intimated to this office within 30 days from the date of its receipt. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 20 th March, (K.D.Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

314 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2087/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: Date of Order : Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: K.D Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of complaint of Sh. Hanuman s/o Daya Ram, Village Balaycha, PO Budian (Mohindergarh) regarding shifting of LT line V/s.. Complainant/Petitioner XEN (OP) DHBVN Mohindergarh SDO (OP) S/U S/Divn DHBVN Mohindergarh Appearance:-.Respondents For Complainant: Present For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer CGRF DHBVN Hisar. 2 Respondent SDO

315 ORDER Sh. Hanuman s/o Daya Ram, Village Balaycha, PO Budian (Mohindergarh) has made a complaint related to SDO, OP S/U Sub Divn. DHBVN Mohindergarh hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. He filed the present complaint stating that LT line feeding to his tubewell is passing through his plot. The height of the wire is low and also it is passing near to his house. He requested the Forum to redress his grievance. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Narnaul for hearing of the case. The proceedings held at Narnaul on The complainant and respondent SDO were present. The consumer argued his case in line with written submission. The SDO submitted written reply vide memo No. 854 dated stating therein that line of the consumer can be shifted only when amount is deposited by consumer for shifting of line. He also submitted that house of consumer is situated in field area and it is not possible to shift the line without depositing of estimated amount. He also placed on record the copy of estimate amounting to Rs Consumer requested the Forum that he is not in a position to make payment of the estimated amount. He also requested the forum to help him and amount of estimate may be got rechecked to which SDO agreed. After considering facts of the case and hearing the parties, the Forum decides that site of complainant may be visited personally by respondent SDO and estimated amount may be recalculated accordingly. It is also decided that credit of dismantled material may be given while preparing estimate. The work of shifting the line may be completed within one month after deposit of amount by complainant. Case is closed. No cost on either side. As required under Haryana State Electricity Regulatory Commission (Guidelines for establishment of Forum for Redressal of Grievances of consumers, Electricity Ombudsman and Consumer Advocacy) Regulations-2016, the implementation of this decision may be intimated to this office within 30 days from the date of its receipt. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 20 th March, (K.D.Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

316 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2088/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: Date of Order : Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: K.D Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of complaint of Sarpanch Gram Panchayat, Village Kanwi, Tehsil Narnaul (Mohindergarh) regarding release of connections for water supply and providing additional T/F in the village V/s.. Complainant/Petitioner XEN (OP) DHBVN Narnaul SDO (OP) S/Divn DHBVN Nangal Choudhary Appearance:-.Respondents For Complainant: None For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer CGRF DHBVN Hisar. 2 Respondent SDO

317 ORDER Sarpanch Gram Panchayat, Village Kanwi, Tehsil Narnaul (Mohindergarh) under SDO, OP Sub Divn. DHBVN, Nangal Choudhary hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. He filed the present complaint stating that they have applied for release of connection for water supply in the village but the same has not been released. He also submitted that due to over loading of T/F there is problem of supply in village. He requested the Forum to redress his grievance. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Narnaul for hearing of the case. The proceedings held at Narnaul on The complainant was not present but respondent SDO was present. The SDO submitted that written reply could not be prepared due to late receipt of application. However, he submitted that connection of water supply shall be released within a week and additional T/F shall be provided within one month After considering facts of the case and hearing the parties, the Forum decides to dispose of complaint with the direction to release the connection and provide additional transformer as assured by SDO. Case is closed. No cost on either side. As required under Haryana State Electricity Regulatory Commission (Guidelines for establishment of Forum for Redressal of Grievances of consumers, Electricity Ombudsman and Consumer Advocacy) Regulations-2016, the implementation of this decision may be intimated to this office within 30 days from the date of its receipt. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 20 th March, (K.D.Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

318 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2090/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: Date of Order : Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: K.D Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of complaint of Sh. Chiranji Lal s/o Neki Ram, VPO Daulat Jat Tehsil Narnaul (Mohindergarh) regarding replacement of worn out ACSR V/s.. Complainant/Petitioner XEN (OP) DHBVN Narnaul SDO (OP) S/U S/Divn DHBVN Ateli Appearance:-.Respondents For Complainant: Present For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer CGRF DHBVN Hisar. 2 Respondent SDO

319 ORDER Sh. Chiranji Lal s/o Neki Ram, VPO Daulat Jat Tehsil Narnaul (Mohindergarh) has got an electricity connection bearing account No. DU-51/0544 under SDO, OP Sub Divn. DHBVN Ateli hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. He filed the present complaint stating that connection to their tubewell was released 45 years back. Due to old age the conductor and poles have got damaged resulting in frequent break down of supply. He requested the Forum to redress his grievance. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Narnaul for hearing of the case. The proceedings held at Narnaul on The complainant and respondent SDO were present. The consumer argued his case in line with written submission. The SDO submitted written reply vide memo No dated 00 dated stating therein that estimate for replacement of old ACSR and damaged PCC pole has been sanctioned by competent authority and work will be completed after harvesting of crop. He assured the forum that work will be completed by He also placed on record the copy of sanctioned estimate. Consumer agreed to submission of SDO. After considering facts of the case and hearing the parties, the Forum decides to dispose of complaint with the direction that worn out ACSR and damaged pole may be replaced by as assured by SDO. Case is closed. No cost on either side. As required under Haryana State Electricity Regulatory Commission (Guidelines for establishment of Forum for Redressal of Grievances of consumers, Electricity Ombudsman and Consumer Advocacy) Regulations-2016, the implementation of this decision may be intimated to this office within 30 days from the date of its receipt. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 20 th March, (K.D.Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

320 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2089/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: Date of Order : Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: K.D Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of complaint of Sh. Balbir Singh Sardar Atta Chakki, Pull Bazar Narnaul regarding correction of bill V/s.. Complainant/Petitioner XEN (OP) DHBVN Narnaul SDO (OP) City S/Divn DHBVN Narnaul Appearance:-.Respondents For Complainant: Present For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer CGRF DHBVN Hisar. 2 Respondent SDO

321 ORDER Sh. Balbir Singh Sardar Atta Chakki, Pull Bazar Narnaul has got an electricity connection bearing account No under SDO, OP City Sub Divn. DHBVN Narnaul hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. He filed the present complaint stating that his meter was replaced in Jan.2018 without any reason. Earlier meter was purchased by him and was working OK. At the time of replacement, Licensee has assured that no rent will be charged but now meter is being charged through Bill. He requested the Forum to redress his grievance. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Narnaul for hearing of the case. The proceedings held at Narnaul on The complainant and respondent SDO were present. The consumer argued his case in line with written submission. He also placed on record the copy of the bill of purchase of earlier meter alongwith elecy bill showing when no rent was charged and when rent was charged. The SDO submitted no written reply but stated that reply could not be prepared due to late receipt of complaint. However he submitted that meter was replaced due to change in tariff and KVAH meter was installed by Nigam at the consumer s premises. Old meter was working OK. After considering facts of the case and hearing the parties, the Forum decides to dispose of complaint with the direction that no meter rent should be charged from the consumer as earlier meter was purchased by consumer and was working OK at the time of replacement. Case is closed. No cost on either side. As required under Haryana State Electricity Regulatory Commission (Guidelines for establishment of Forum for Redressal of Grievances of consumers, Electricity Ombudsman and Consumer Advocacy) Regulations-2016, the implementation of this decision may be intimated to this office within 30 days from the date of its receipt. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 20 th March, (K.D.Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

322 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2022/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: & Date of Order Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: K.D.Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman Manu Bishnoi, Independent Membr In the complaint of M/S Indus Tower Ltd Site at Mameri Ahir, (SCO No. 137 FF, Sector -13 UE Karnal) Rewari regarding wrong billing V/s XEN (OP) Divn. DHBVN, Dharuhera SDO (OP) Sub Divn., DHBVN, Pali Gothra.. Complainant/Petitioner Appearance:- For Complainant: Present.Respondents For the Respondent Nodal Officer CGRF Hisar. Representative of SDO

323 ORDER M/S Indus Tower Ltd Site at Mameri Ahir, (SCO No. 137 FF, Sector -13 UE Karnal) Rewari has got an electricity connection bearing Account No. BD-21/56 under (OP) Sub-Division, DHBVN, Pali Gothra, has filed a complaint through Sh. MS Chauhan. Hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. The complainant has filed the present complaint stating therein that account of their connection was overhauled for the period of 3/15 to 6/16 on the basis of checking report of M&P dated He further submitted that meter at their connection was installed on and found working OK by M&P during 3/2013, 3/2014 and 3/2015. He further submitted that there was fault in CT chamber of meter installed at their premises and supply remained disconnected during this period and same was restored on so the charging on the basis of average is unjustified. He further submitted that as per HERC regulation issued vide Reg No.29/2014, a notice is required to be issue to them before charging any amount. The said amount has been charged to them without any notice. He prayed the Forum to issue the bill as per actual recorded consumption from and refund actual provision billing done during the period. He submitted on record th copy of M&P reports, copy of ledger from 3/12 to 9/17. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Rewari for hearing of the case. The proceedings of the case held at Rewari on The complainant and representative of respondent SDO were present. The complainant argued his case in line with written submissions. The SDO filed written statement vide No.5154 dated SDO submitted only the calculation of the amount charged to consumer and no parawise reply is submitted by him. Since no detailed reply was submitted by SDO and complainant also requested for next date, the hearing deferred to next date. Now to come on Proceedings were held at Narnaul on Complainant submitted the replication to reply submitted by defendant Nigam on During hearing the representative of complainant stated that pointwise reply has not been supplied by respondent SDO. However, as per reply submitted the account to be overhauled is for Rs whereas actual provisional billing was made amounting to Rs He also submitted that correct tariff has not been levied for relevant period of 3/12 to 4/16 as per recorded consumption. Representative of SDO was present who could not explain anything nor he produced pointwise reply as asked during earlier hearing. Representative was simply a spectator and could not brought out anything in the defense of Licensee. Nodal Officer also could not explain anything.

324 After considering facts of the case and hearing the parties, the Forum observed that Licensee is not defending the case properly and forum has no option but to decide the case in the absence of defence of licensee. The forum further observed that LT CT meter was installed on as per M&P checking report vide MT 1 No.2051/21 dated Meter was working OK during the checking of M&P on However, it was found CT defective from which was set right during checking. Forum therefore decides that account of consumer may be overhauled as per actual consumption recorded by the meter from to-date after adjusting average and levy of penalty if any on account of slowness. The forum also decides that while recalculating the bill relevant tariff and multiplying factor may be made available accordingly.. Case is closed. No cost on either side. As required under Haryana State Electricity Regulatory Commission (Guidelines for establishment of Forum for Redressal of Grievances of consumers, Electricity Ombudsman and Consumer Advocacy) Regulations-2016, the implementation of this decision may be intimated to this office within 30 days from the date of its receipt. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 20 th March, (K.D.Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

325 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2086/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: Date of Order Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: K.D.Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member regarding wrong billing In the complaint of Sh. Shiv Kumar s/o Som Dutt, Pandiya Chowk, Bawal, Rewari V/s XEN (OP) Divn. DHBVN, Dharuera SDO (OP) DHBVN, Bawal.. Complainant/Petitioner Appearance:- For Complainant: None.Respondents For the Respondent Nodal Officer CGRF Hisar. Respondent SDO

326 ORDER Sh. Shiv Kumar s/o Som Dutt, Pandiya Chowk, Bawal, Rewari has got an electricity connection bearing account No. N42-CP1D0330 under SDO, OP Sub Divn. DHBVN Bawal hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. He filed the present complaint stating that he applied for change of meter on but meter was not replaced till Nov Even after replacement of meter no reading is recorded by MR and bill is still raised on average basis. He requested the Forum to redress his grievance. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Narnaul for hearing of the case. The proceedings held at Narnaul on The complainant was not present and respondent SDO were present who submitted reply vide memo No.2155 dated stating therein that consumer meter was defective form 10/16 to 12/17. During this period bill was raised to consumer on average basis on consumption recorded during same month of previous year. Consumer meter was replaced during 11/17 at IR 1, delay of meter was not intentional and meter could not be replaced due to shortage of meter in Store. Account of consumer will be overhauled as per new meter consumption as per Licensee instructions. He also placed on record MCO checking report dated and consumer ledger from Aug.2015 to Feb After considering facts of the case and hearing the parties, the Forum decides to dispose of complaint with the direction that bill of complainant may be overhauled on the basis of actual reading recorded by meter after replacement of old meter. Forum also decides to take action against meter reading agency for recording wrong billing. Case is closed. No cost on either side. As required under Haryana State Electricity Regulatory Commission (Guidelines for establishment of Forum for Redressal of Grievances of consumers, Electricity Ombudsman and Consumer Advocacy) Regulations-2016, the implementation of this decision may be intimated to this office within 30 days from the date of its receipt. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 20 th March, (K.D.Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

327 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2093/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: Date of Order: Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: 1. K D Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman 2 Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of complaint of Sh. Mander Singh s/o Bakhtawar Singh, Vill Pacca Sahian, Tehsil Kalanwali Sirsa, regarding release of tubewell connection V/s.. Complainant/Petitioner 1 Xen/Op. City Division, DHBVN, Dabwali 2 SDO (OP) DHBVN, Kalanwali.Respondents Appearance:- For Complainant: Present For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer/CGRF, DHBVN, Hisar 2 Representative of Respondent SDO

328 ORDER Sh. Mander Singh s/o Bakhtawar Singh, Vill Pacca Sahian, Tehsil Kalanwali Sirsa, has applied for tubewell connection under SDO/Op DHBVN, Kalanwali, Sirsa, hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. The complainant has filed the present complaint stating therein that he applied for tubewell connection and paid Rs on Now SDO has intimated that his connelction cannot be released and he may withdraw the amount deposited with Nigam. The complainant requested to redress his grievance. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Sirsa for hearing of the case. The proceedings were held at Sirsa on Consumer and representative of SDO were present. SDO submitted written reply vide memo No. Spl.1 dated stating therein that application of complainant bearing A&A No has not been cancelled so far. If the complainant deposits the balance amount and completes the formalities required for release of connection within 10 days, the connection shall be released accordingly. Consumer agreed to complete the formalities within next 10 days. After hearing both the parties and going through the record, the Forum decides to dispose of the complaint with the direction that connection of complainant be released as per seniority and instructions of licensee if he deposits balance amount and completes the formalities required for release of connection within next 10 days. Case is closed. No cost on either side. As required under Haryana State Electricity Regulatory Commission (Guidelines for establishment of Forum for Redressal of Grievances of consumers, Electricity Ombudsman and Consumer Advocacy) Regulations-2016, the implementation of this decision may be intimated to this office within 30 days from the date of its receipt. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 22 th March, (K.D. Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

329 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2100/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: Date of Order: Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: 1. K D Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman 2 Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of complaint of Sh. Rakesh Kumar s/o Sher Singh, Near Shiv Mandir Kirti Nagar, Begu Road, Sirsa, regarding wrong billing V/s.. Complainant/Petitioner 1 Xen/Op. City Division, DHBVN, Sirsa 2 SDO (OP) City DHBVN, Sirsa.Respondents Appearance:- For Complainant: Present For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer/CGRF, DHBVN, Hisar 2 Representative of Respondent SDO

330 ORDER Sh. Rakesh Kumar s/o Sher Singh, Near Shiv Mandir Kirti Nagar, Begu Road,Sirsa, has got an electricity connection bearing account No under SDO/Op, City DHBVN, Sirsa, Sirsa, hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. The complainant has filed the present complaint stating therein that a bill for the period to was issued to him without reading. He lodged a complaint with Nigam on and thereafter a bill of 8018 units was raised. The complainant requested to redress his grievance. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Sirsa for hearing of the case. The proceedings were held at Sirsa on Consumer and SDO were present. SDO submitted written reply vide memo No. 603 dated stating therein that meter of consumer was replaced on and referred to Lab. Meter found defective at the time of testing showing abnormal behavior. He further submitted that consumer bill will be rectified after entry of MCO in system. SDO placed on record M&T checking report dated , LL1 dated and consumption from to 3/2018. Consumer was present who stated that his meter was checked during 6/2008 by a private agency hired by Nigam at site and meter was reported to be running fast. He reported matter to Licensee but till date his meter is not replaced and now meter has become defective and giving abnormal consumption. He requested to get his complaint redressed. After hearing both the parties and going through the record, the Forum observed that 1. M&T lab report has been prepared in a very casual way. It has not been signed either by SDO or JE incharge of Lab. Also abnormality pointed out has been explained in Lab report. 2. Connected load of the consumer was found higher than sanctioned load. The forum therefore, decides to dispose of the complaint with the direction that account of consumer may be overhauled on the basis of load recorded at the time of checking and account may be overhauled thereafter keeping in view the consumption recorded by new meter. Case is closed. No cost on either side. As required under Haryana State Electricity Regulatory Commission (Guidelines for establishment of Forum for Redressal of Grievances of consumers, Electricity Ombudsman and Consumer Advocacy) Regulations-2016, the implementation of this decision may be intimated to this office within 30 days from the date of its receipt. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 22 th March, (K.D. Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

331 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2104/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: Date of Order: Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: 1. K D Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman 2 Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of complaint of Sh. Mohan Lal Sharma, near Shiv Mandir, Kirti Nagar Sirsa, regarding wrong billing V/s.. Complainant/Petitioner 1 Xen/Op. City Division, DHBVN, Sirsa 2 SDO (OP) City DHBVN, Sirsa.Respondents Appearance:- For Complainant: None For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer/CGRF, DHBVN, Hisar 2 Representative of Respondent SDO

332 ORDER Sh. Mohan Lal Sharma, near Shiv Mandir, Kirti Nagar Sirsa, has applied has got an electricity connection baring account No under SDO/Op City DHBVN, Sirsa, hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. The complainant has filed the present complaint stating therein that he is residing with his son at Delhi and in Sirsa his old meter and children are residing. Elecy Bill of his connection at Sirsa is issued by taking wrong reading since He further submitted that on a bill of reading 1094 units has been raised for 30 days. He requested Forum to get his bill on correct reading issued from to The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Sirsa for hearing of the case. The proceedings were held at Sirsa on Consumer and SDO were present. SDO submitted written reply vide memo No. 602 dated stating therein that consumer has lodged a complaint for checking of meter and same meter was referred to Lab. As per lab report meter working was found within permissible limit and reading recorded as Representative of SDO submitted that bill was raised on actual reading basis and there is no abnormality in recording reading and bill is correct. He requested to file the complaint. He also placed on record a copy of M&T lab report, consumption data of consumer from 5/16 to and site checking report of JE dated After hearing both the parties and going through the record, the Forum decides to dispose of the complaint with no direction as there is no merit in the complaint because variation in consumption is not abnormal. Case is closed. No cost on either side. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 22 th March, (K.D. Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

333 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2046/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: Date of Order: Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: 1 K.D.Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman 2 Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of complaint of Smt. Santosh Devi w/o Baru Ram, HN 334 DC Colony Bhiwani regarding adjustment of meter cost... Complainant/Petitioner V/s 1 Xen (OP) City Division, DHBVN, Bhiwani 2 SDO (OP)S/U No.1 DHBVN, Bhiwani Appearance:-.Respondents For Complainant: Representative For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer/CGRF, DHBVN, Hisar 2 Respondent SDO

334

335 ORDER Smt. Santosh Devi w/o Baru Ram, HN 334 DC Colony Bhiwani got an electricity connection bearing account No under SDO (OP) S/U No.1 DHBVN Bhiwani, hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. The complainant has filed the present complaint stating therein that she got a solar energy pannel installed at her residence. For this purpose net meter was required to be installed but Sh. Wazir Singh JE asked her to purchase a power meter from the market and also got cost of net meter deposited. The power meter purchased by her on the direction of JE got useless and she has suffered a loss of Rs The complainant requested to get the meter cost adjusted. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Bhiwani for hearing of the case. Proceedings of the case were held at Bhiwani on The representative of complainant & respondent SDO were present. The respondent SDO filed written reply vide No. 206 dated stating therein that complainant applied for extension of load to 6.0 kw on her existing S/P connection. She deposited a three phase whole current meter and same was got tested form the Lab. During installation of meter at site, it came to the notice of JE incharge that consumer has installed solar panel at her residence and applied for net meter separately. Therefore the three phase meter purchased by the consumer was not installed. The meter was desealed and returned to consumer on her request. SDO requested the Forum that request of complainant may be filed as his office acted in accordance with the consumer case submitted by applicant. The representative of consumer was present and argued the case in line with written submission and stated that she acted according to direction of Nigam and an applicant does not know the difference of Net meter and power meter so cost levied on a/c of purchase of power meter may be adjusted. After going through the record on case file and hearing the parties, the Forum finds no merit in the arguments of complainant as the consumer applied for solar panel and extension of load separately and it was not possible for Licensee to know the facts simply on the basis of consumer case file. The complaint is disposed off accordingly with no direction to respondent SDO. Case is closed. Both the parties to bear their own costs. File be consigned to record.

336 Given under our hands on this day of 13 th February, (K.D.Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

337 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2051/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: Date of Order: Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: 1 K.D.Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman 2 Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of complaint of Sh. Mahabir Parsad c/o Jyoti Flour Mill near Civil Hospital, Loharu Chowk, Bhiwani Road, Ch. Dadri regarding wrong billing... Complainant/Petitioner V/s 1 Xen (OP) Division, DHBVN, Ch. Dadri 2 SDO (OP)City DHBVN, Ch. Dadri Appearance:-.Respondents For Complainant: Present For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer/CGRF, DHBVN, Hisar 2 Representative of Respondent SDO

338

339 ORDER Sh. Mahabir Parsad c/o Jyoti Flour Mill near Civil Hospital, Loharu Chowk, Bhiwani Road, Ch. Dadri got an electricity connection bearing account No. GR under SDO (OP) City DHBVN Ch. Dadri, hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. The complainant has filed the present complaint stating therein that meter installed at his premises became defective in the year and recorded abnormal MDI as well as reading. Meter was changed and defective meter was sent to manufacturer firm in March The meter was checked by firm in 2015 and reported that one of the power supply component found defective/failure and due to this abnormal signal harmed meter circuit resulting in abnormal MDI and readings. He further stated that his connection was disconnected and meter stands removed. The complainant requested to get the bill corrected and restoration of supply. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Bhiwani for hearing of the case. Proceedings of the case were held at Bhiwani on The complainant & respondent SDO were present. The respondent SDO filed written reply vide No. 428 dated stating therein that meter of the consumer got defective in May-2013 due to which billing was done on abnormal basis upto April Meter was got checked from the manufacturer firm and after the report of the firm an amount of Rs stands adjusted vide SCA&R No.246/30 and an amount of Rs is outstanding against the consumer. SDO further intimated that RCO could not be effected after 6 months of PDCO as per instructions of Licensee. He submitted on record copy of XEN(OP) Dadri office letter No according approval to overhaul the account, report of manufacturer dated , copy of ledger from Oct.2011 to March-2017 and request of M/s Jyoti Flour Mill dated and copy of sundry dated Representative of SDO stated that consumer failed to make the payment resulting in accumulation of defaulting amount and connection of complainant stand disconnected on defaulting amount. The consumer was present and argued that he paid the amount on part payment basis as his meter was defective and bill was raised to him abnormally. He could not make the payment fully due to abnormal bills raised by Licensee. He requested the Forum to adjust the reading/raise the bill during defective period on the basis of correct meter period. He further stated that his connection be restored and defaulting amount without surcharge be recovered in three equal installments for which he is ready to give undertaking to the Nigam.

340 After going through the record on case file and hearing the parties, the Forum observed that consumer has failed to make the payment of Licensee consistently and defaulting amount of Rs is outstanding against the complainant and an amount of Rs including surcharge of Rs on account of abnormal MDI has already been adjusted by the respondent SDO. The Forum further observed that average bill has been raised during the month Jan.2017 to March-2017 and Feb.2016 to April The Forum decides to dispose of the complaint with the direction that the bill raised on the basis of average consumption during period April-2013 to date may also be adjusted alongwith surcharge if not adjusted earlier. The defaulting amount after recalculation may be accepted in three equal installments without levying surcharge on balance amount. Case is closed. Both the parties to bear their own costs. As required under Haryana State Electricity Regulatory Commission (Guidelines for establishment of Forum for Redressal of Grievances of consumers, Electricity Ombudsman and Consumer Advocacy) Regulations-2016, the implementation of this decision may be intimated to this office within 30 days from the date of its receipt. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 13 th February, (K.D.Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

341 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2034/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing Date of Order : Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: 1 K.D.Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman 2 Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of Sh. Inder Kumar 243 /14, Moh Dogran Opp: Chandu Halwai Hisar regarding wrong billing. V/s.. Complainant/Petitioner Appearance:- For Complainant: XEN (OP) Divn.No.1 DHBVN, Hisar SDO (OP) City S/D DHBVN, Satrod.Respondents Present For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer CGRF Hisar 2 Respondent SDO

342 ORDER Sh. Inder Kumar 243 /14, Moh Dogran Opp: Chandu Halwai, Hisar has got an electricity connection bearing account No under (OP) City Sub Divn. Hisar hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. The complainant has filed present complaint stating therein that he has been issued a wrong bill without taking reading. The complainant requested for redressal of his grievances. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Hisar for hearing of the case. present. The proceedings held at Hisar on The complainant and SDO (OP) City were SDO filed written reply vide No 2116 dated stating therein that bill of consumer has been corrected and a sum of Rs has been adjusted vide SC&AR No.542/96. Consumer contested the statement of respondent SDO and stated that after adjustment of amount he paid balance amount and as such there was no outstanding from previous bill. His current bill is less the amount shown as balance in the bill. He further stated that surcharge on the amount to be adjusted during last bill has been levied in the current bill also. After considering the facts on records and hearing the parties, the Forum decides to dispose off the complaint with the direction surcharge levied on the amount to be adjusted may also be adjusted and revised bill to be issued to the applicant.. Case is closed. Both the parties to bear their own cost. As required under Haryana State Electricity Regulatory Commission (Guidelines for establishment of Forum for Redressal of Grievances of consumers, Electricity Ombudsman and Consumer Advocacy) Regulations-2016, the implementation of this decision may be intimated to this office within 30 days from the date of its receipt. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 8 th February (K.D.Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

343 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2036/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing Date of Order : Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: 1 K.D.Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman 2 Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of Sh. Ashish Goyal s/o Satish Goyal, Gali No.4 Mill Gate, Vinod Nagar Hisar regarding wrong billing. V/s.. Complainant/Petitioner Appearance:- For Complainant: XEN (OP) Divn.No.1 DHBVN, Hisar SDO (OP) City S/D DHBVN, Satrod.Respondents None For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer CGRF Hisar 2 Respondent SDO

344 ORDER Sh. Ashish Goyal s/o Satish Goyal, Gali No.4 Mill Gate, Vinod Nagar, Hisar has got an electricity connection bearing account No under (OP) City Sub Divn. Hisar hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. The complainant has filed present complaint stating therein that subject cited electricity connection has been installed in a small shop in the name of his mother. Since last one year bills are raised on average basis whereas consumption recorded by meter is less than the average consumption. As on the recording recorded by MR was The complainant requested for redressal of his grievances. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Hisar for hearing of the case. The proceedings held at Hisar on The complainant was not present and SDO (OP) City was present. No written reply was filed by respondent SDO. However he submitted that meter of consumer has been got checked and bill raised to the consumer on actual reading recorded basis. The grievance of consumer stands redressed and requested to file the complaint. After considering the facts on records and hearing the parties, the Forum decides to dispose off the complaint keeping in view statement made by SDO as the grievance of consumer stands redressed.. Case is closed. Both the parties to bear their own cost. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 8 th February (K.D.Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

345 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2041/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing Date of Order : Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: 1 K.D.Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman 2 Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of Smt Geeta Devi w/o Sh. Mahavir Singh, VPO Kaimri, near Kutiya Sansarchand Hisar regarding wrong billing. V/s.. Complainant/Petitioner Appearance:- For Complainant: XEN (OP) Divn.No.2 DHBVN, Hisar SDO (OP) S/D DHBVN, Satrod.Respondents Present For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer CGRF Hisar 2 Representative of Respondent SDO

346 ORDER Smt Geeta Devi w/o Sh. Mahavir Singh, VPO Kaimri, near Kutiya Sansarchand, Hisar has got an electricity connection bearing account No. LL1D4373-A under (OP) City Sub Divn. Hisar hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. The complainant has filed present complaint stating therein that bill has been issued to her on an billing recorded by meter which is on higher side. Keeping in view her past consumption as well as reading recorded by new meter, consumption is not justified. The complainant requested for redressal of her grievances. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Hisar for hearing of the case. The proceedings held at Hisar on The complainant was not present and SDO (OP) City was present. The reply was filed by respondent SDO vide No.405 dated stating therein that the bill raised to consumer is correct and as per actual reading recorded by meter. Consumer requested to get the meter checked from Lab. Meter was sent to Lab. and Lab submitted report stating therein that working of meter is within permissible limits with reading as 4964 and Lab also downloaded the data recorded by meter. SDO placed on record the copy of reading record from Jan.2016 to Jan.2018, SJO No.8/535 dated , downloaded report of meter and M&P checking report. He further stated that load used by consumer varies from 2.48 to 4.51 KW and reading recorded is around 350 (average) whereas MR recorded consumption of around units hence it is a case of accumulation of reading and nothing is refundable to consumer. Consumer was present who argued in line with written statement and stated that due to defect (block burnt) in his meter her reading was recorded abnormally during the m/o 10/2017. She placed on record the copy of checking report by ALM on where the meter block has been reported as burnt. After considering the facts on records and hearing the parties, the Forum decides to dispose off the complaint with the direction that:- 1. Since it is a case of accumulation of reading and downloaded data shows the reading recorded by the meter from to the date of replacement of meter so the reading accumulated in 10/17 may be bifurcated as per actual consumption reported by meter and tariff /slab benefit may be given accordingly. 2. Legal/penal action may be taken against meter reading agency who recorded the false reading during the period. Case is closed. Both the parties to bear their own cost. As required under Haryana State Electricity Regulatory Commission (Guidelines for establishment of Forum for Redressal of Grievances of consumers, Electricity Ombudsman and Consumer Advocacy) Regulations-2016, the implementation of this decision may be intimated to this office within 30 days from the date of its receipt.

347 File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 8 th February (K.D.Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

348 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar Telephone No (website: Case No. DH/CGRF /2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: Date of Order: Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: 1 K.D.Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman 2 Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of complaint of Sarpanch Gram Panchaya, Ganda Khera, Block Uchana ( Jind) regarding supply problem V/s.. Complainant/Petitioner XEN (OP) DHBVN, Narwana SDO (OP) DHBVN, Uchana.Respondents Appearance:- For Complainant: None For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer CGRF Hisar 2 Representative of Respondent SDO

349 ORDER Sarpanch Gram Panchaya, Ganda Khera, Block Uchana ( Jind) under (OP) S/D Uchana, (Jind) has made a complaint and hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint The complainant has filed the present complaint stating therein that the there is electricity problem in their village. He has requested the forum to get the ACSR tightened, erection of poles and energization of T/F. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Jind for hearing of the case. The proceedings held at Jind on Neither complainant nor his representative was present. The representative of respondent SDO was present. The respondent SDO filed written reply vide no dated stating therein that due to hurdle created by the villagers the work of installing stay could not be completed resulting in non energisation of T/F and loosening of wires. Now with the help of Gram Panchayat T/F has been energized and conductor has been tightened so at present there is no problem regarding electricity and complaint of complainant has been redressed. After taking into consideration the facts of the case and keeping in view the reply submitted by respondent SDO, the Forum observed that complaint of complainant has already been redressed and therefore decided to dispose of the complaint accordingly. The case is closed. Both the parties to bear their own cost. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 6 th February, (K.D.Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

350 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar Telephone No (website: Case No. DH/CGRF /2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: Date of Order: Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: 1 K.D.Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman 2 Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of complaint of Smt. Kailash Devi w/o Balbir Singh, Luxmi Nagar, Rohtak Road, Jind regarding wrong allocation of group V/s.. Complainant/Petitioner XEN (OP) DHBVN, JInd SDO (OP) S/U S/D No.2 DHBVN, Uchana.Respondents Appearance:- For Complainant: Representative For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer CGRF Hisar 2 Representative of Respondent SDO

351 ORDER Smt. Kailash Devi w/o Balbir Singh, Luxmi Nagar, Rohtak Road Jind has got an electricity connection bearing account No under (OP) S/U S/D No.2 Jind has made a complaint and hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint The complainant has filed the present complaint stating therein that the she is resident of Luxmi Nagar. She was getting elecy bills upto 7/2016 but thereafter she received no bills. On enquiry it was found that her connection has been allocated to wrong group resulting in non delivery of bills. On he herself recorded reading and got the bill issued and even after that no bill issued to her. She requested to get redressed her complaint. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Jind for hearing of the case. The proceedings held at Jind on The representative of complainant was present. The representative of respondent SDO was also present. The respondent SDO filed written reply vide no dated stating therein that binder code was wrongly issued to account of complainant at the time of incremental migration by RAPDRP team. Due to non availability of rights with the S/d binder of the complainant could not be changed. Now the binder management code has been introduced and binder code will be changed in forthcoming bill. He further requested to file the complaint in view of his reply. Representative of complainant was present who agreed to the contention of the respondent SDO. After taking into consideration the facts of the case and keeping in view the reply submitted by respondent SDO, the Forum decides to dispose of the complaint with the direction that SDO shall ensure the change of binder code in the forthcoming bill alongwith recording of proper meter reading and distribution of bill to the consumer. The case is closed. Both the parties to bear their own cost. As required under Haryana State Electricity Regulatory Commission (Guidelines for establishment of Forum for Redressal of Grievances of consumers, Electricity Ombudsman and Consumer Advocacy) Regulations-2016, the implementation of this decision may be intimated to this office within 30 days from the date of its receipt. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 6 th February, (K.D.Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

352 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar Telephone No (website: Case No. DH/CGRF /2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: Date of Order: Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: 1 K.D.Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman 2 Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of complaint of Sh. Chhaju Ram s/o Sh. Paras Ram, H.N.77 Sector-8,Jind regarding change of meter V/s.. Complainant/Petitioner XEN (OP) DHBVN, JInd SDO (OP) S/U DHBVN, Jind.Respondents Appearance:- For Complainant: None For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer CGRF Hisar 2 Representative of Respondent SDO

353 ORDER Sh. Chhaju Ram s/o Sh. Paras Ram, H.N.77 Sector-8Jind has got an electricity connection bearing account No under (OP) S/D Jind has made a complaint and hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint The complainant has filed the present complaint stating therein that during December 2017 Meter reader visited his premises and reported that meter installed at his premises is not showing readings. He requested to get his unit checked and meter replaced at the earliest.. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Jind for hearing of the case. The proceedings held at Jind on The complainant was not present. The representative of respondent SDO was present. The respondent SDO filed written reply vide no. 295 dated stating therein that meter of consumer was got checked on and found that reading not visible. Accordingly same has been replaced on He further submitted that satisfaction report of complainant alongwith his reply. After taking into consideration the facts of the case and keeping in view the reply submitted by respondent SDO, the Forum decides to dispose of the complaint as the complainant of complainant has already been redressed and consumer is satisfied. The case is closed. Both the parties to bear their own cost. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 6 th February, (K.D.Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

354 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar Telephone No (website: Case No. DH/CGRF /2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: Date of Order: Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: 1 K.D.Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman 2 Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of complaint of Sh. Naveen s/o Sh. Manohar Lal, Saini Mohalla, near Manju Hotel, Jind regarding wrong billing V/s.. Complainant/Petitioner XEN (OP) DHBVN, Jind SDO (OP) DHBVN, Jind.Respondents Appearance:- For Complainant: None For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer CGRF Hisar 2 Representative of Respondent SDO

355 ORDER Sh. Naveen s/o Sh. Manohar Lal, Saini Mohalla, near Manju Hotel, Jind has got an electricity connection bearing account No under (OP) S/D Jind has made a complaint and hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint The complainant has filed the present complaint stating therein that his meter got damaged sometime ago and he got meter replaced thereafter. He has been charged on higher average basis during defective period and even reading has not been recorded for 4-5 months resulting in charging of higher tariff. He requested to get his complaint redressed. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Jind for hearing of the case. The proceedings held at Jind on The complainant was not present. The representative of respondent SDO was present. The respondent SDO filed written reply vide no. 333 dated stating therein that premises of consumer was got checked on with reading as 2947 and working within limit (OK). He further stated that bills to the consumer has been issued as per consumption recorded in the meter and there is no abnormality in the bill. He stated that average during defective period ha been charged on the basis of consumer recorded by meter of consumer and in view of Licensee instructions. After taking into consideration the facts of the case and keeping in view the reply submitted by respondent SDO, the Forum decides to dispose of the complaint as there is no merit in the complainant of complainant and therefore decides to dispose off the complaint accordingly.. The case is closed. Both the parties to bear their own cost. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 6 th February, (K.D.Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

356 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar Telephone No (website: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2037/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: Date of Order: Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: 1 K.D.Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman 2 Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of complaint of Sh. Subhash s/o Sh. Mangal Ram, Punjabi Chowk Narwana, Jind regarding wrong billing V/s.. Complainant/Petitioner XEN (OP) DHBVN, Narwana SDO (OP) DHBVN, Narwana.Respondents Appearance:- For Complainant: Present For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer CGRF Hisar 2 Representative of Respondent SDO

357 ORDER Sh. Subhash s/o Sh. Mangal Ram, Punjabi Chowk Narwana, Jind has got an electricity connection bearing account No under (OP) S/D Narwana has made a complaint and hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint The complainant has filed the present complaint stating therein that the meter installed at his premises recorded a consumption of units during the month of Sept He further submitted that his consumption before and after replacement of meter is around units whereas bill of Rs has been raised during Oct.2016 He requested to get his complaint redressed. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Jind for hearing of the case. The proceedings held at Jind on The complainant and representative of respondent SDO were present. The respondent SDO filed written reply vide no. 116 dated stating therein that bill to the consumer during the month of 9/2016 was generated for units for the period of 91 days on OK basis. Consumer raised the demand to check the accuracy of meter in M&T Lab and deposited testing fees. Meter was replaced vide MCO No.84/807 dated and sent to Lab. for testing. M&T Lab submitted reports in this regard. And reporting meter reading as and working of meter was found within permissible limits. Meter was checked in Lab by running the meter for 4 units. He further stated that consumer was not satisfied with the Lab report and requested for per day consumption data. Meter was again sent to Lab which was referred to firm by Lab. Manufacturing firm did not provide the data and replied that energy meter is out of guarantee period. He placed on record the copy of MCO, Lab report, firm report and consumption data of consumer from to Nov Consumer was present who argued that consumption at his premises is very low and recording of consumption of units in 91 days could not be justified and there is some abnormality in the meter. He further argued that low consumption at his premises is due to no work. After hearing the party the representative of SDO was directed to submit copy of checking report showing the connected load as well as present reading of the meter by 5.00 PM. He was also directed to submit the reasons for resending the meter to Lab once it has been reported as working within permissible limits. Representative of SDO could not explain the facts of the case and this indicates the casual attitude of representative of S/Divn while attending the Forum.

358 After taking into consideration the facts of the case and non submission of proper reply by respondent SDO and Nodal Officer of the Licensee, the Forum decides to dispose of the complaint with the direction that matter may be investigated by the concerned SE (OP) and a speaking order regarding the charging and penal action against the billing agency/officials of the Nigam be passed within 30 days of the date of order. The case is closed. Both the parties to bear their own cost. As required under Haryana State Electricity Regulatory Commission (Guidelines for establishment of Forum for Redressal of Grievances of consumers, Electricity Ombudsman and Consumer Advocacy) Regulations-2016, the implementation of this decision may be intimated to this office within 30 days from the date of its receipt. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 6 th February, (K.D.Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

359 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 1999/2017 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: Date of Order : Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: K.D Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of complaint of Sh. Ram Niwas s/o Sh. Khar Singh, Sadat Nagar, Kosili Distt. Mahindergarh regarding wrong billing V/s.. Complainant/Petitioner XEN (OP) DHBVN Kosli SDO (OP) DHBVN Kosli Appearance:-.Respondents For Complainant: None For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer CGRF DHBVN Hisar. 2 Representative of SDO

360 ORDER Sh. Ram Niwas s/o Sh. Khar Singh, Sadat Nagar, Kosili Distt. Mahindergarh has got an electricity connection bearing A/C No. H-62D-215A under SDO, OP Sub Divn.DHBVN Kosli and filed the present complaint stating therein that he got 4 KV roof top solar plant installed at his premises in August He is not getting rebate for solar planbt and also billed for MMC. He requested to Forum that he may be charged as per units consumed and MMC should not be charged The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Narnaul for hearing of the case. The proceedings held at Narnaul on The complainant was not present and representative of respondent SDO was present. The SDO filed written reply vide No dated stating therein that record of the consumer has been checked and found that bill was not raised to consumer as per net metering basis. Net meter data has been updated in the billing and consumer bill raised on actual consumption basis and also rebate of solar metering has been given to consumer in the bill of After considering facts of the case and hearing the parties, the Forum finds that grievances of consumer has been redressed and decided to dispose off the complaint in view of reply submitted by SDO. The case is closed. No cost on either side. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 22 nd February, (K.D.Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

361 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2006/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: Date of Order : Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: K.D Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of complaint of Sh. Sunil Kumar s/o Sh. Ram Bilas, Archana Sound Centre, 2 nd Floor, Balmiki Sabha, Narnaul regarding issue of bill after request for disconnection. V/s.. Complainant/Petitioner XEN (OP) DHBVN Narnaul SDO (OP) City DHBVN Narnaul Appearance:-.Respondents For Complainant: None For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer CGRF DHBVN Hisar. 2 Respondent SDO

362 ORDER Sunil Kumar s/o Sh. Ram Bilas, Archana Sound Centre, 2 nd Floor, Balmiki Sabha, Narnaul has got an electricity connection bearing A/C No under SDO, OP City Sub Divn. DHBVN Narnaul and filed the present complaint stating he has applied for disconnection of meter installed at hs premises on but the supply has not been disconnected so far. He further submitted that occupant of premises Sh. Rajesh s/o Om Parkash has applied for another connection in the same premises and using the supply by connecting the meter directly. He requested to redress his grievance and get the supply disconnection. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Narnaul for hearing of the case. The proceedings held at Narnaul on The complainant was not present and respondent SDO was present. The SDO filed written reply vide No dated stating therein that consumer applied for PDCO on his request, the supply was disconnected temporarily but due to non payment of final payment of the bill PDCO could not be affected. He requested the Forum to file the complaint as PDCO on request can only be effected after payment of final bill. After considering facts of the case and hearing the parties, the Forum decides to dispose off the complaint with the direction that supply of consumer premises may be disconnected on account of defaulting amount. The case is closed. No cost on either side. As required under Haryana State Electricity Regulatory Commission (Guidelines for establishment of Forum for Redressal of Grievances of consumers, Electricity Ombudsman and Consumer Advocacy) Regulations-2016, the implementation of this decision may be intimated to this office within 30 days from the date of its receipt. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 22 nd February, (K.D.Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

363 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2008/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: Date of Order : Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: K.D Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of complaint of Smt. Sangeeta Devi w/o Sh. Ramesh Manav, HN LIG-825 Housing Board Colony Narnaul regarding wrong billing. V/s.. Complainant/Petitioner XEN (OP) DHBVN Narnaul SDO (OP) S/U DHBVN Narnaul Appearance:-.Respondents For Complainant: Present For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer CGRF DHBVN Hisar. 2 Respondent SDO

364 ORDER Smt. Sangeeta Devi w/o Sh. Ramesh Manav, HN LIG-825 Housing Board Colony Narnaul has got an electricity connection bearing A/C No. HB1D-632A under SDO, OP S/U Sub Divn. DHBVN Narnaul and filed the present complaint stating that she is making payment of eldectricity bill regularly and there is no outstanding towards her till date but Licensee has placed Rs as sundry charge sin her bill. Se requested to redress her grievance. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Narnaul for hearing of the case. The proceedings held at Narnaul on The complainant and respondent SDO were present. The consumer argued his case in line with written submission. The SDO filed written reply vide No dated stating therein that meter of consumer remained defective from 4/15 to 12/15 and the account of consumer has now been overhauled. During the audit of bill on the basis of 12/15 to 10/16. He further stated that the bill of consumer has been raised on the consumption of consumer and requested this Forum the complaint. Consumer argued the case in line with written statement and submitted that his account was overhauled from 4/15 to 2/16 on the basis of 12/15 to 10/16 thus there is overlapping of period from 12/15 to 2/16. He requested the Forum to overhaul the account on the basis of corresponding period of previous year or after replacement of meter. After considering facts of the case and hearing the parties, the Forum finds that the audit para raised by audit wing of Licensee is not justified as there is overlapping of period in charging and charged period. The Forum therefore decides to dispose of complaint with the direction that account of consumer may be overhauled for defective period of 4/15 to 10/15 on the basis of corresponding period from 4/16 to 10/16. The case is closed. No cost on either side. As required under Haryana State Electricity Regulatory Commission (Guidelines for establishment of Forum for Redressal of Grievances of consumers, Electricity Ombudsman and Consumer Advocacy) Regulations-2016, the implementation of this decision may be intimated to this office within 30 days from the date of its receipt. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 22 nd February, (K.D.Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

365 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2009/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: Date of Order : Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: K.D Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of complaint of Faizabad,PO Hudina (Mohindergarh) regarding wrong billing. Sh. Ramesh Kumar s/o Sh.Pradhan Yadav Village V/s.. Complainant/Petitioner XEN (OP) DHBVN Narnaul SDO (OP) S/U DHBVN Narnaul Appearance:-.Respondents For Complainant: Present For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer CGRF DHBVN Hisar. 2 Respondent SDO

366 ORDER Sh. Ramesh Kumar s/o Sh.Pradhan Yadav Village Faizabad,PO Hudina (Mohindergarh)has got an electricity connection bearing A/C No. HH1D-3255 under SDO, OP S/U Sub Divn. DHBVN Narnaul and filed the present complaint stating that his bill has been raised on wrong reading basis. He requested to get his meter checked redress his grievance. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Narnaul for hearing of the case. The proceedings held at Narnaul on The complainant and respondent SDO were present. The consumer argued his case and stated that his bill was corrected by respondent SDO but still an average bill was raised during the month of Feb He requested the Forum to direct the respondent SDO to take reading properly. The SDO filed written reply vide No dated stating therein that bill of consumer has been rectified vide SCA&R No.R-71/18 dated and the same has been deposited by the consumer. He requested the Forum to file the complaint. Respondent SDO also assured the Forum that penal action will be taken against billing agency for recording incorrect reading After considering facts of the case and hearing the parties, the Forum decides to dispose of the complaint in view reply submitted by SDO as the complaint of consumer has already been settled. The forum also directs the respondent SDO to take penal action against the billing agency for recording wrong billing. The case is closed. No cost on either side. As required under Haryana State Electricity Regulatory Commission (Guidelines for establishment of Forum for Redressal of Grievances of consumers, Electricity Ombudsman and Consumer Advocacy) Regulations-2016, the implementation of this decision may be intimated to this office within 30 days from the date of its receipt. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 22 nd February, (K.D.Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

367 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2010/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: Date of Order : Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: K.D Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of complaint of Smt. Santosh w/o Sh. Satish Kumar HN 559, Sector-1 Phase-II HUDA Narnaul regarding release of connection. V/s.. Complainant/Petitioner XEN (OP) DHBVN Narnaul SDO (OP) City DHBVN Narnaul Appearance:-.Respondents For Complainant: None For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer CGRF DHBVN Hisar. 2 Respondent SDO

368 ORDER Smt. Santosh w/o Sh. Satish Kumar HN 559, Sector-1 Phase-II HUDA Narnaul has applied for electricity connection under SDO, OP City Sub Divn. DHBVN Narnaul and filed the present complaint stating that she has applied for release of temp connection in her premises. She has deposited requite with Licensee on but till date no connection has been released. She requested to get get connection released at the earliest. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Narnaul for hearing of the case. The proceedings held at Narnaul on The complainant was not present and respondent SDO was present. The consumer argued his case in line with written submission. The SDO filed written reply vide No dated stating therein that the connection of complainant has been released by installing a meter and at present there is no grievance of consumer is standing against the Nigam. He requested to file the complaint accordingly. After considering facts of the case and hearing the parties, the Forum decides to dispose of the complaint in view reply submitted by SDO as the complaint of consumer has already been settled. The case is closed. No cost on either side. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 22 nd February, (K.D.Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

369 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2011/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: Date of Order : Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: K.D Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of complaint of Sh. Ram Chander s/o Mangal Singh, Vil Dongra Ahir, Tehsil Kanina (Mohindergarh) regarding refund of excess amount. V/s.. Complainant/Petitioner XEN (OP) DHBVN Mohindergarh SDO (OP) City DHBVN Mohindergarh Appearance:-.Respondents For Complainant: Present For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer CGRF DHBVN Hisar. 2 Respondent SDO

370 ORDER Sh. Ram Chander s/o Mangal Singh, Vil Dongra Ahir, Tehsil Kanina (Mohindergarh) has got an electricity connection bearing account No. DA-53/2124 under SDO, OP City Sub Divn. DHBVN Mohindergarh and filed the present complaint stating that he deposited Rs for release of his tubewell connection by installing two spans of line under SC No. D-80/2001 but at the time of release of connection only one span was installed and requested the forum to get balance amount refunded. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Narnaul for hearing of the case. The proceedings held at Narnaul on The complainant and respondent SDO were present. The consumer argued his case in line with written submission. The SDO filed written reply vide No. 567 dated stating therein that at the time of release of connection an estimate for two span was framed and an amount of Rs was got deposited from the consumer under SC D-80/2001. Connection was released by the o/o XEN/Works Narnaul by installing one span line. He further stated that a request was made by his office to XEN/W Rewari on for supplying the copy of EMB to XEN/.W Rewari. Now XEN/W Rewari supplied the same on and as per EMB only one span was installed for releasing elecy connection of complainant. After considering facts of the case and hearing the parties, the Forum decides to dispose of the complaint with the direction that excess amount of Rs recovered from the consumer for the release of tubewell connection may be refunded immediately. Case is closed. No cost on either side. As required under Haryana State Electricity Regulatory Commission (Guidelines for establishment of Forum for Redressal of Grievances of consumers, Electricity Ombudsman and Consumer Advocacy) Regulations-2016, the implementation of this decision may be intimated to this office within 30 days from the date of its receipt. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 22 nd February, (K.D.Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

371 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2012/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: Date of Order : Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: K.D Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of complaint of Sh. Vijay Kumar s/o Arisal, VPO Nangal Chaudhary, (Mohindergarh) regarding shifting of tubewell connection. V/s.. Complainant/Petitioner XEN (OP) DHBVN Narnaul SDO (OP) City DHBVN Nangal Chaudhary Appearance:-.Respondents For Complainant: Present For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer CGRF DHBVN Hisar. 2 Representative of SDO

372 ORDER Sh. Vijay Kumar s/o Arisal, VPO Nangal Chaudhary, (Mohindergarh) has got an electricity connection bearing account No. AK under SDO, OP Sub Divn. DHBVN Nangal Chaudhary and filed the present complaint stating that he has an electricity connection at his tubewell but due to unknown reason tubewell bore is not working. He requested the Forum to get his connection shifted at the new tubewell bore. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Narnaul for hearing of the case. The proceedings held at Narnaul on The complainant and representative of respondent SDO were present. The consumer argued his case in line with written submission. The SDO filed written reply vide No. 388 dated stating therein that the transfer of tubewell connection cannot be done due to dark zone (notified area). He also submitted that consumer has not deposited any documents with the Licensee regarding shifting of his tubewell connection. He further submitted that as per instructions of Licensee tubewell connection cannot be transferred in the other Kila No. of owner, although he may be owner of total land. Consumer was present agreed to deposit the necessary documents with the Licensee so that further action can be taken accordingly by the respondent SDO After considering facts of the case and hearing the parties, the Forum decides to dispose of the complaint with the direction that the necessary documents may be accepted from the consumer and further decision regarding shifting of tubewell connection may be taken as per merit of case and instructions of HERC. Case is closed. No cost on either side. As required under Haryana State Electricity Regulatory Commission (Guidelines for establishment of Forum for Redressal of Grievances of consumers, Electricity Ombudsman and Consumer Advocacy) Regulations-2016, the implementation of this decision may be intimated to this office within 30 days from the date of its receipt. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 22 nd February, (K.D.Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

373 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2013/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: Date of Order : Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: K.D Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of complaint of Smt. Chhoto Devi w/o Sh. Suresh Kumar Kailash Nagar, Rewari Road, Narnaul regarding change of category. V/s.. Complainant/Petitioner XEN (OP) DHBVN Narnaul SDO (OP) City DHBVN Narnaul Appearance:-.Respondents For Complainant: None For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer CGRF DHBVN Hisar. 2 Respondent SDO

374 ORDER Smt. Chhoto Devi w/o Sh. Suresh Kumar Kailash Nagar, Rewari Road, Narnaul has got an electricity connection bearing account No under SDO, OP City Sub Divn. DHBVN Narnaul and filed the present complaint stating that she deposited consumer case file for change of category from DS to NDS. She requested to redress his grievance. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Narnaul for hearing of the case. The proceedings held at Narnaul on The complainant was not present and respondent SDO was present. The SDO filed written reply vide No dated stating therein the category of connection of complaint and grievance stands settled. He requested the Forum to file the complaint. After considering facts of the case and hearing the parties, the Forum decides to dispose of the complaint in view reply submitted by SDO as the complaint of consumer has already been settled. The case is closed. No cost on either side. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 22 nd February, (K.D.Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

375 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2015/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: Date of Order : Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: K.D Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of complaint of Sh. Suresh Kumar s/o Jai Ram Nai Sari W-22, Narnaul regarding wrong billing. V/s.. Complainant/Petitioner XEN (OP) DHBVN Narnaul SDO (OP) City DHBVN Narnaul Appearance:-.Respondents For Complainant: Present For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer CGRF DHBVN Hisar. 2 Respondent SDO

376 ORDER Sh. Suresh Kumar s/o Jai Ram Nai Sari W-22,, Narnaul has got an electricity connection bearing account No under SDO, OP City Sub Divn. DHBVN Narnaul and filed the present complaint stating that Licensee is not recording the reading properly since 11/2017 resulting in higher charges of slab system. He further stated that reading recorded by meter is 105 units in 56 days for the month of Oct.2017 whereas reading recorded in 27 days has been shown as 225 units. He requested to redress his grievance. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Narnaul for hearing of the case. The proceedings held at Narnaul on The complainant and respondent SDO were present. The consumer argued his case in line with written submission. The SDO filed written reply vide No dated stating therein that the consumption recorded by the meter depends on usage and it cannot be stated that wrong reading has been recorded without any specific evidence on record. He requested the Forum to file the complaint of consumer as correct reading has been recorded and bill raised accordingly. Consumer argued the case and further submitted that no action has been taken by respondent SDO even after complaint to this Forum on dated even no reading has been recorded for the bill raised on He further submitted he got meter reading checked from AFM of the Sub Divn. on and meter working was found OK and reading to be He requested the Forum to settle the dispute and take action against billing agency. He also placed on record the copy of report of Sh. Ram Shankar AFM. After considering facts of the case and hearing the parties, the Forum decides to dispose of the complaint with the direction that proper reading may be recorded and bill be raised on the actual reading recorded by meter. The Forum also directs SDO to take penal action aginst billing agency for recording no reading. The case is closed. No cost on either side. As required under Haryana State Electricity Regulatory Commission (Guidelines for establishment of Forum for Redressal of Grievances of consumers, Electricity Ombudsman and Consumer Advocacy) Regulations-2016, the implementation of this decision may be intimated to this office within 30 days from the date of its receipt.

377 File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 22 nd February, (K.D.Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

378 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2016/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: Date of Order : Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: K.D Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of complaint of Smt. Shakuntla Devi w/o Krishan Chand, Ram Nagar Gali No.1, Nasibpur, Narnaul regarding replacement of meter. V/s.. Complainant/Petitioner XEN (OP) DHBVN Narnaul SDO (OP) S/U DHBVN Narnaul Appearance:-.Respondents For Complainant: Present For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer CGRF DHBVN Hisar. 2 Respondent SDO

379 ORDER Smt. Shakuntla Devi w/o Krishan Chand, Ram Nagar Gali No.1, Nasibpur, Narnaul has got an electricity connection bearing account No. HB1D-2135 under SDO, OP S/U Sub Divn. DHBVN Narnaul and filed the present complaint stating that on there was sparking in meter installed iat her premises. She reported the matter on toll free number and employee of Nigam made the supply direct. She deposited Rs on for replacement of meter but after 4 months meter has not been replaced and bill raised to her on average basis. She requested to redress her grievance. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Narnaul for hearing of the case. The proceedings held at Narnaul on The complainant and respondent SDO were present. The consumer argued his case in line with written submission. She further submitted that her meter has not been replaced even after passing of 6 months and bill is raised on the average basis. She requested to get her meter replaced and correct the bill accordingly. The SDO filed written reply vide No dated stating therein that meter of consumer will be replaced within a week time due to non availability of meter in D/Store Narnaul. He assured the Forum that meter will be replaced by After considering facts of the case and hearing the parties, the Forum decides to dispose of the complaint in view reply submitted by SDO with the direction that meter may be replaced within a weeks time as assured by the respondent SDO and bill of defective period may be overhauled on the basis of consumption of corresponding months of previous year. The case is closed. No cost on either side. As required under Haryana State Electricity Regulatory Commission (Guidelines for establishment of Forum for Redressal of Grievances of consumers, Electricity Ombudsman and Consumer Advocacy) Regulations-2016, the implementation of this decision may be intimated to this office within 30 days from the date of its receipt. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 22 nd February, (K.D.Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

380 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2017/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: Date of Order : Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: K.D Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of complaint of Sh. Sanjay Kumar s/o Arjun Lal, Moh. Nalapur, Narnaul regarding wrong billing. V/s.. Complainant/Petitioner XEN (OP) DHBVN Narnaul SDO (OP) City DHBVN Narnaul Appearance:-.Respondents For Complainant: None For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer CGRF DHBVN Hisar. 2 Respondent SDO

381 ORDER Sh. Sanjay Kumar s/o Arjun Lal, Moh. Nalapur,, Narnaul has got an electricity connection bearing account No under SDO, OP City Sub Divn. DHBVN Narnaul and filed the present complaint stating that he is making the payment of electricity bills regularly and there is no outstanding against him but still in the month of Oct an amount of Rs has been posted in his bill. He requested to redress his grievance. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Narnaul for hearing of the case. The proceedings held at Narnaul on The complainant was not present and respondent SDO was present. The SDO filed written reply vide No dated stating therein that meter of consumer was changed vide MCO No.7/163 dated as the meter remained defective from 1/2012 to 7/2014. The account of consumer was overhauled by the audit party on the basis of consumption recorded during 10/14 to 8/2015. He further pointed out that amount charged to consumer is correct and requested the Forum to file the complaint. After considering facts of the case and hearing the parties, the Forum decides to dispose of the complaint in view reply submitted by SDO. As account of consumer has been overhauled on the consumption recorded by the meter installed at the premises of consumer and finds no merit in this case. The case is closed. No cost on either side. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 22 nd February, (K.D.Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

382 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2018/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: Date of Order : Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: K.D Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of complaint of Sh. Babu Lal s/o Rameshwar Dayal, Nangal Chaudhary Road, Baba Kheta Nagar, Narnaul regarding wrong billing. V/s.. Complainant/Petitioner XEN (OP) DHBVN Narnaul SDO (OP) City DHBVN Narnaul Appearance:-.Respondents For Complainant: Present For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer CGRF DHBVN Hisar. 2 Respondent SDO

383 ORDER Sh. Babu Lal s/o Rameshwar Dayal, Nangal Chaudhary Road, Baba Kheta Nagar, Narnaul has got an electricity connection bearing account No under SDO, OP City Sub Divn. DHBVN Narnaul and filed the present complaint stating that a bill of Rs has been raised for a period of 39 days showing the units consumed as He requested to redress his grievance. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Narnaul for hearing of the case. The proceedings held at Narnaul on The complainant and respondent SDO were present. The consumer argued his case in line with written submission. He further submitted that reading recorded by meter during the last two years of so the reading recorded is in the range of units and during Nov.2017 consumption of 1790 has been recorded which can not be without mal functioning of meter. He further submitted that his sanctioned load is 1.0 KW and there is a small shop and consumption is not possible. Consumption recorded even after replacement of meter is in the range of units. The SDO filed written reply vide No dated stating therein that no specific grievance was pointed out by consumer in his complaint. However on checking the record it is found that a reading of KW hour was shown to be consumed and meter is shown as defective. The final reading is 2546 unit which is correct and bill raised on final reading recorded basis. However the meter of consumer has been replaced on his request for his satisfaction. Consumer stressed upon to get meter checked from the Lab. After considering facts of the case and hearing the parties, the Forum decides to dispose of the complaint with the direction that meter of consumer may be got checked from M&T Lab in the present of consumer and further action may be taken in view of Lab report.. The case is closed. No cost on either side. As required under Haryana State Electricity Regulatory Commission (Guidelines for establishment of Forum for Redressal of Grievances of consumers, Electricity Ombudsman and Consumer Advocacy) Regulations-2016, the implementation of this decision may be intimated to this office within 30 days from the date of its receipt. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 22 nd February, (K.D.Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

384 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2019/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: Date of Order : Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: K.D Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of complaint of Sh. Sher Singbh s/o RamJi Lal r/o Vil Mandi, Tehsil Narnaul (Mohindergarh) regarding installation of poles in his premises unauthorizedly. V/s.. Complainant/Petitioner XEN (OP) DHBVN Narnaul SDO (OP) S/U DHBVN Narnaul Appearance:-.Respondents For Complainant: Present For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer CGRF DHBVN Hisar. 2 Respondent SDO

385 ORDER Sh. Sher Singh s/o RamJi Lal r/o Vil Mandi, Tehsil Narnaul (Mohindergarh) has got an electricity connection under SDO, OP City Sub Divn. DHBVN Narnaul and filed the present complaint stating that Nigam is installing poles in his plot unauthorizedly. The source of supply to the premises is changed from inside the village to outside village. He requested to redress his grievance. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Narnaul for hearing of the case. The proceedings held at Narnaul on The complainant and respondent SDO were present. The consumer argued his case in line with written submission. The SDO filed written reply vide No dated stating therein that the site of consumer was checked by him alongwith Sh. Subha Ram JE incharge in the presence of Sarpanch of village. He further submitted that poles are being erected under DDUGJY project on the existing route of already installed electric poles and lines. No pole is erected in the field of complainant. He further submitted that as per site the work is technically justified. He placed on record statement of Sarpanch Gram Panchayat stating that poles of LT line are erected on the side of the path and no pole is erected inside the field of consumer. SDO further stated that poles are to be erected for giving supply to the consumers and even if complainant demands electricity is to be given to him by erecting poles which may be installed near to the premises of other consumer and consumer has no right to object the erection of line in common land of village. Consumer was present who stated that supply is given to other consumers and pole should not be erected towards his site, He further submitted that he will never take elecy at his field of crop from this line.sdo requested the Forum to file the complaint. After considering facts of the case and hearing the parties, the Forum decides to dispose of the complaint in view reply submitted by SDO as Forum finds no merit in the complaint of complainant. The Forum further observed that lines are to be erected in the common land of village for giving supply to the various consumers. In this case line erected is technically justified and poles are erected in the common land of village as per statement of Sarpanch Gram Panchayat. The Forum decides to dispose off the complaint accordingly. Case is closed. No cost on either side. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 22 nd February, (K.D.Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

386 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2044/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: Date of Order Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: K.D.Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman Manu Bishnoi, Independent Membr In the complaint of Sh. Mahender Singh s/o Tej Ram Vil Churivas, Tehsil and Distt. Rewari regarding wrong billing V/s XEN (OP) Divn. DHBVN, Rewari SDO (OP) S/U Sub Divn., DHBVN, Rewari.. Complainant/Petitioner Appearance:- For Complainant: Present.Respondents For the Respondent Nodal Officer CGRF Hisar. Representative of SDO

387 ORDER Sh. Mahender Singh s/o Tej Ram Vil Churivas, The and Distt. Rewari has got an electricity connection bearing Account No. BC1D-242 under (OP) S/U Sub-Division, DHBVN, Rewari, has filed a complaint. Hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. The complainant has filed the present complaint stating therein that he and his family is residing at Gurgaon since last 35 years. The meter installed at their premises in village is used sparingly and MR is recording incorrect reading since last many months. He requested the Forum to reduce his sanctioned load to 2.5 Kw to 1.0 Kw and redress his grievance. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Rewari for hearing of the case. The proceedings of the case held at Rewari on The complainant and representative of respondent SDO were present. The SDO filed written statement vide No dated stating that reading of consumer was wrongly taken by HESL staff from 9/17 to 1/18 and bill was raised on average basis. Now the bill of complainant has been rectified as per actual consumption vide SC&AR No. 87/R-512. He further submitted that load of consumer can be reduced only on request of consumer and for that he may apply for reduction of load with the Licensee. Consumer was present and copy of reply was handed to him and he was informed to apply for reduction of load in the office of respondent SDO. Consumer was satisfied. After considering facts of the case and hearing the parties, the Forum decides to dispose of the complaint in view of reply submitted by SDO as complaint of consumer has been redressed. However Forum directs the respondent SDO to reduce the load of consumer within 10 days after complainant completes usual formalities required by Nigam. Case is closed. No cost on either side. As required under Haryana State Electricity Regulatory Commission (Guidelines for establishment of Forum for Redressal of Grievances of consumers, Electricity Ombudsman and Consumer Advocacy) Regulations-2016, the implementation of this decision may be intimated to this office within 30 days from the date of its receipt. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 22 nd February, (K.D.Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

388 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2039/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: & Date of Order Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: 1. K D Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman 2 Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member billing. In the matter of complaint of Smt. Saraswati Devi, 101 E Block Sirsa, regarding wrong.. Complainant/Petitioner V/s 1 Xen/Op. City Division, DHBVN, Sirsa 2 SDO (OP) Ind Area, S/Divn. DHBVN, Sirsa.Respondents Appearance:- For Complainant: None For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer/CGRF, DHBVN, Hisar 2 Respondent SDO

389 ORDER Smt. Saraswati Devi, 101 E Block Sirsa, got an electricity connection bearing account No under SDO/Op I/A, Sub-Division, DHBVN, Sirsa, hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. The complainant has filed the present complaint stating therein that her bill has been raised on the basis of wrong reading. She made a complaint to the Nigam and thereafter her bill was corrected after getting meter checked. Now meter is replaced and department has raised a bill of Rs which is abnormal. The complainant requested to correct the bill. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Sirsa for hearing of the case. The complaint was heard during the sitting of Forum at Sirsa on The complainant and respondent SDO were present. The respondent SDO filed written submission vide No. 274 dated stating meter of consumer was changed vide MCO No.75/597 dated (affected on ) and meter of the reading was found as and working of the meter was reported as block burnt. The consumer argued that her meter was replaced on block burnt whereas reading was recorded continuously so charging on average is not justified. She requested to get the working checked from Lab. After considering the facts of the case on record and hearing of the parties the Forum directed SDO to get the meter checked from M&T Lab. and put up report during next hearing. Case is adjourned. Now to come up on next date of hearing. Proceedings held at Sirsa on SDO stated that meter of Smt. Saraswati Devi bearing account No has already been returned to M&T Lab Sirsa vide memo No.4601 dated as block burnt and reading was found to be He placed on record the copy of challan vide which meter was sent to Lab. He further stated that meter could not be checked at this stage since meter has already been returned to Lab before the direction of Forum. Consumer was not present nor his representative attended to defend her case. After hearing the parties and going through the record file, the Forum finds no merit in the complaint of complainant as it is a case of accumulation of reading, therefore, decides to dispose of complaint in view of reply submitted by SDO. Case is closed and both the parties to bear their own case. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 23 th February, (K.D. Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

390 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2059/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: Date of Order: Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: 1. K D Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman 2 Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of complaint of Smt. Virma Devi w/o Sh. Sohan Lal,773 Rania Chungi Wali Gali, Moh:Goshala Sirsa, regarding wrong billing. V/s.. Complainant/Petitioner 1 Xen/Op. City Division, DHBVN, Sirsa 2 SDO (OP) City S/Divn. DHBVN, Sirsa.Respondents Appearance:- For Complainant: Present For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer/CGRF, DHBVN, Hisar 2 Representative of Respondent SDO

391 ORDER Smt. Virma Devi w/o Sh.Sohan Lal, 773 Rania Chungi Wali Gali, Moh:Goshala Sirsa,, has got an electricity connection bearing account No under SDO/Op City Sub-Division, DHBVN, Sirsa, hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. The complainant has filed the present complaint stating therein that monthly elecy bill ranges from 1500 to 2000 whereas during the month of Jan.2018 a bill of Rs has been raised by taking wrong reading which is unjustified. The complainant requested to redress her grievance. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Sirsa for hearing of the case. The proceedings were held at Sirsa on Consumer and representative of SDO were present. SDO submitted written reply vide memo No.373 dated stating therein that the meter of subject cited consumer was checked and reading was found to be 3896 with working OK. Bill of the complainant has been rectified and an amount of Rs is outstanding against her. He also intimated that complainant was informed on her telephone on for rectification of bill and deposit of Rs before due date i.e Complainant was present and a copy of reply alongwith duplicate bill was handed to her. She was satisfied with the reply of SDO and agreed to pay the bill. After hearing both the parties and going through the record, the Forum finds that grievance of complainant has been redressed so decided to dispose off the complaint in view of reply submitted by SDO. Case is closed. No cost on either side. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 23 th February, (K.D. Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

392 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2071/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: Date of Order: Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: 1. K D Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman 2 Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of complaint of Sh. Radhey Sham, Gali Teliyanwali, Opp Baljeet Singh Press Reporter Sirsa, regarding wrong billing. V/s.. Complainant/Petitioner 1 Xen/Op. City Division, DHBVN, Sirsa 2 SDO (OP) I/A S/Divn. DHBVN, Sirsa.Respondents Appearance:- For Complainant: Present For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer/CGRF, DHBVN, Hisar 2 Respondent SDO

393 ORDER Sh. Radhey Sham, Gali Teliyanwali, Opp Baljeet Singh Press Reporter Sirsa,, has got an electricity connection bearing account No under SDO/Op I/A Sub-Division, DHBVN, Sirsa, hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. The complainant has filed the present complaint stating therein that monthly elecy bill ranges from 700 to 1000 whereas during the month of Nov a bill of Rs has been raised by taking wrong reading which is unjustified. He further stated that his meter was got checked from the Lab in his absence and he is not satisfied with the Lab report. The complainant requested to redress his grievance. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Sirsa for hearing of the case. The proceedings were held at Sirsa on Consumer and SDO were present. SDO submitted written reply vide memo No. 606 dated stating therein that the premises of complainant was checked on vide LL1 No and reading was found to be He further submitted that meter was referred to Lab for checking verification of reading and accuracy. M&T Lab reported that the working of meter is within permissible limits. He placed on record copy of LL1 dated , Lab report dated and consumption data for the period 1/2013 to 2/2018. Consumer argued the case in line with written statement and also stated that consumption recorded at his premises during last 5 years is in the range of units and connected load found at the time of checking KW and for a load of 2.0 KW is not possible to record such high units. Consumer was asked whether he wants to get the meter checked any other Lab to which he denied. After hearing both the parties and going through the record, the Forum finds that the meter has been checked by the Lab and there is no ground to reject the Lab report. Consumption recorded by the meter may be result of accumulation of reading and therefore Forum decides to dispose off the complaint as there is no merit in the complaint. Case is closed. No cost on either side. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 23 th February, (K.D. Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

394 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2072/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: Date of Order: Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: 1. K D Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman 2 Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of complaint of Sh. Sita Ram, Gali Near GRG School behind CMK College Sirsa, regarding wrong billing. V/s.. Complainant/Petitioner 1 Xen/Op. City Division, DHBVN, Sirsa 2 SDO (OP) I/A S/Divn. DHBVN, Sirsa.Respondents Appearance:- For Complainant: Present For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer/CGRF, DHBVN, Hisar 2 Respondent SDO

395 ORDER Sh. Sita Ram, Gali Near GRG School behind CMK College Sirsa, has got an electricity connection bearing account No under SDO/Op I/A Sub-Division, DHBVN, Sirsa, hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. The complainant has filed the present complaint stating therein that he has installed Atta Chakki (flour mill) in his premises during last 2-3 months. MDI recorded in his meter has been taken wrongly by the meter reading agency and excess load surcharge has been levied. The complainant requested to redress his grievance. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Sirsa for hearing of the case. The proceedings were held at Sirsa on Consumer and SDO were present. SDO submitted written reply vide memo No. 607 dated stating therein that consumer meter recorded exceeded MDI during the last two months. As the MDI was recorded excess so MDI penalty was charged to the consumer. He further stated that premises of consumer was again checked on and at present MDI recorded by the meter is 8.86 kw whereas connected lead is KW. He also placed on record the consumption data from 10/15 to 01/18 and LL1 dated Consumer was present who stated that connected load at his premises is only KW so recording of MDI of 18 KW is not possible. He also stated that he made a complaint to Nigam but no action was taken by the Licensee who checked his premises at the time wrong MDI was recorded by reading agency. He requested the forum to refund MDI penalty levied on him. After hearing both the parties and going through the record, the Forum finds no merit in the complaint of consumer as he could not produce any evidence in support of his claim MDI penalty has been levied as per MDI recorded by meter and is in accordance with HERC regulation and instructions of the Licensee. Case is closed. No cost on either side. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 23 th February, (K.D. Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

396 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2039/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: & Date of Order Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: 1. K D Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman 2 Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member billing. In the matter of complaint of Smt. Saraswati Devi, 101 E Block Sirsa, regarding wrong.. Complainant/Petitioner V/s 1 Xen/Op. City Division, DHBVN, Sirsa 2 SDO (OP) Ind Area, S/Divn. DHBVN, Sirsa.Respondents Appearance:- For Complainant: None For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer/CGRF, DHBVN, Hisar 2 Respondent SDO

397 ORDER Smt. Saraswati Devi, 101 E Block Sirsa, got an electricity connection bearing account No under SDO/Op I/A, Sub-Division, DHBVN, Sirsa, hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. The complainant has filed the present complaint stating therein that her bill has been raised on the basis of wrong reading. She made a complaint to the Nigam and thereafter her bill was corrected after getting meter checked. Now meter is replaced and department has raised a bill of Rs which is abnormal. The complainant requested to correct the bill. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Sirsa for hearing of the case. The complaint was heard during the sitting of Forum at Sirsa on The complainant and respondent SDO were present. The respondent SDO filed written submission vide No. 274 dated stating meter of consumer was changed vide MCO No.75/597 dated (affected on ) and meter of the reading was found as and working of the meter was reported as block burnt. The consumer argued that her meter was replaced on block burnt whereas reading was recorded continuously so charging on average is not justified. She requested to get the working checked from Lab. After considering the facts of the case on record and hearing of the parties the Forum directed SDO to get the meter checked from M&T Lab. and put up report during next hearing. Case is adjourned. Now to come up on next date of hearing. Proceedings held at Sirsa on SDO stated that meter of Smt. Saraswati Devi bearing account No has already been returned to M&T Lab Sirsa vide memo No.4601 dated as block burnt and reading was found to be He placed on record the copy of challan vide which meter was sent to Lab. He further stated that meter could not be checked at this stage since meter has already been returned to Lab before the direction of Forum. Consumer was not present nor his representative attended to defend her case. After hearing the parties and going through the record file, the Forum finds no merit in the complaint of complainant as it is a case of accumulation of reading, therefore, decides to dispose of complaint in view of reply submitted by SDO. Case is closed and both the parties to bear their own case. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 23 th February, (K.D. Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

398 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2059/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: Date of Order: Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: 1. K D Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman 2 Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of complaint of Smt. Virma Devi w/o Sh. Sohan Lal,773 Rania Chungi Wali Gali, Moh:Goshala Sirsa, regarding wrong billing. V/s.. Complainant/Petitioner 1 Xen/Op. City Division, DHBVN, Sirsa 2 SDO (OP) City S/Divn. DHBVN, Sirsa.Respondents Appearance:- For Complainant: Present For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer/CGRF, DHBVN, Hisar 2 Representative of Respondent SDO

399 ORDER Smt. Virma Devi w/o Sh.Sohan Lal, 773 Rania Chungi Wali Gali, Moh:Goshala Sirsa,, has got an electricity connection bearing account No under SDO/Op City Sub-Division, DHBVN, Sirsa, hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. The complainant has filed the present complaint stating therein that monthly elecy bill ranges from 1500 to 2000 whereas during the month of Jan.2018 a bill of Rs has been raised by taking wrong reading which is unjustified. The complainant requested to redress her grievance. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Sirsa for hearing of the case. The proceedings were held at Sirsa on Consumer and representative of SDO were present. SDO submitted written reply vide memo No.373 dated stating therein that the meter of subject cited consumer was checked and reading was found to be 3896 with working OK. Bill of the complainant has been rectified and an amount of Rs is outstanding against her. He also intimated that complainant was informed on her telephone on for rectification of bill and deposit of Rs before due date i.e Complainant was present and a copy of reply alongwith duplicate bill was handed to her. She was satisfied with the reply of SDO and agreed to pay the bill. After hearing both the parties and going through the record, the Forum finds that grievance of complainant has been redressed so decided to dispose off the complaint in view of reply submitted by SDO. Case is closed. No cost on either side. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 23 th February, (K.D. Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

400 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2071/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: Date of Order: Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: 1. K D Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman 2 Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of complaint of Sh. Radhey Sham, Gali Teliyanwali, Opp Baljeet Singh Press Reporter Sirsa, regarding wrong billing. V/s.. Complainant/Petitioner 1 Xen/Op. City Division, DHBVN, Sirsa 2 SDO (OP) I/A S/Divn. DHBVN, Sirsa.Respondents Appearance:- For Complainant: Present For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer/CGRF, DHBVN, Hisar 2 Respondent SDO

401 ORDER Sh. Radhey Sham, Gali Teliyanwali, Opp Baljeet Singh Press Reporter Sirsa,, has got an electricity connection bearing account No under SDO/Op I/A Sub-Division, DHBVN, Sirsa, hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. The complainant has filed the present complaint stating therein that monthly elecy bill ranges from 700 to 1000 whereas during the month of Nov a bill of Rs has been raised by taking wrong reading which is unjustified. He further stated that his meter was got checked from the Lab in his absence and he is not satisfied with the Lab report. The complainant requested to redress his grievance. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Sirsa for hearing of the case. The proceedings were held at Sirsa on Consumer and SDO were present. SDO submitted written reply vide memo No. 606 dated stating therein that the premises of complainant was checked on vide LL1 No and reading was found to be He further submitted that meter was referred to Lab for checking verification of reading and accuracy. M&T Lab reported that the working of meter is within permissible limits. He placed on record copy of LL1 dated , Lab report dated and consumption data for the period 1/2013 to 2/2018. Consumer argued the case in line with written statement and also stated that consumption recorded at his premises during last 5 years is in the range of units and connected load found at the time of checking KW and for a load of 2.0 KW is not possible to record such high units. Consumer was asked whether he wants to get the meter checked any other Lab to which he denied. After hearing both the parties and going through the record, the Forum finds that the meter has been checked by the Lab and there is no ground to reject the Lab report. Consumption recorded by the meter may be result of accumulation of reading and therefore Forum decides to dispose off the complaint as there is no merit in the complaint. Case is closed. No cost on either side. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 23 th February, (K.D. Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

402 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 2072/2018 Date of Institution: Date of Hearing: Date of Order: Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: 1. K D Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman 2 Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of complaint of Sh. Sita Ram, Gali Near GRG School behind CMK College Sirsa, regarding wrong billing. V/s.. Complainant/Petitioner 1 Xen/Op. City Division, DHBVN, Sirsa 2 SDO (OP) I/A S/Divn. DHBVN, Sirsa.Respondents Appearance:- For Complainant: Present For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer/CGRF, DHBVN, Hisar 2 Respondent SDO

403 ORDER Sh. Sita Ram, Gali Near GRG School behind CMK College Sirsa, has got an electricity connection bearing account No under SDO/Op I/A Sub-Division, DHBVN, Sirsa, hence this Forum has jurisdiction to hear the complaint. The complainant has filed the present complaint stating therein that he has installed Atta Chakki (flour mill) in his premises during last 2-3 months. MDI recorded in his meter has been taken wrongly by the meter reading agency and excess load surcharge has been levied. The complainant requested to redress his grievance. The complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer for filing the written reply of the Nigam and both the parties were asked to appear before the Forum on at Sirsa for hearing of the case. The proceedings were held at Sirsa on Consumer and SDO were present. SDO submitted written reply vide memo No. 607 dated stating therein that consumer meter recorded exceeded MDI during the last two months. As the MDI was recorded excess so MDI penalty was charged to the consumer. He further stated that premises of consumer was again checked on and at present MDI recorded by the meter is 8.86 kw whereas connected lead is KW. He also placed on record the consumption data from 10/15 to 01/18 and LL1 dated Consumer was present who stated that connected load at his premises is only KW so recording of MDI of 18 KW is not possible. He also stated that he made a complaint to Nigam but no action was taken by the Licensee who checked his premises at the time wrong MDI was recorded by reading agency. He requested the forum to refund MDI penalty levied on him. After hearing both the parties and going through the record, the Forum finds no merit in the complaint of consumer as he could not produce any evidence in support of his claim MDI penalty has been levied as per MDI recorded by meter and is in accordance with HERC regulation and instructions of the Licensee. Case is closed. No cost on either side. File be consigned to record. Given under our hands on this day of 23 th February, (K.D. Bansal) Member Technical-cum-Chairman (Manu Bishnoi) Independent Member

404 FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar Telephone No (website: ( ID: Case No. DH/CGRF- 1968/2017 Date of Institution: 16/11/2017 Date of Hearing: 27/11/2017, & Date of Order: Before the Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances, DHBVN Present: 1. K D Bansal, Member Technical-cum-Chairman 2 Rajesh Sharma, Member Accounts 3. Manu Bishnoi, Independent Member In the matter of complaint of M/s. TATA Communications Ltd., Site at Sidhrawali, Manesar (Gurugram) through Amit Kumar Jain, E-11, Jangpura Extension, IGF (New Delhi) , regarding wrong billing. V/s.. Complainant/Petitioner 1 Xen (OP) Division, DHBVN, Manesar (Gurugram) 2 SDO (OP) S/Divn. DHBVN,, Bhora Kalan.Respondents Appearance:- For Complainant: Present For the Respondent 1 Nodal Officer/CGRF, DHBVN, Hisar 2 Respondent SDO & Others

BEFORE THE CHAIRMAN FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK,

BEFORE THE CHAIRMAN FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, BEFORE THE CHAIRMAN FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Ground Floor, Vidyut Sadan, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar-125 005 (website: www.dhbvn.com) (e-mail ID: cgrfdhbvn@gmail.com)

More information

Maharashtra State Electricity Distribution Co. Ltd. s Consumer Grievance Redressal Forum Nagpur Urban Zone, Nagpur. Case No. CGRF(NUZ)/040/2009

Maharashtra State Electricity Distribution Co. Ltd. s Consumer Grievance Redressal Forum Nagpur Urban Zone, Nagpur. Case No. CGRF(NUZ)/040/2009 Maharashtra State Electricity Distribution Co. Ltd. s Consumer Grievance Redressal Forum Nagpur Urban Zone, Nagpur Case No. CGRF(NUZ)/040/2009 Applicant : Shri Pratap Jaykisan Kanjwani At, 116, Chikhali,

More information

PUNJAB STATE ELECTRICITY REGULATORY COMMISSION SCO NO , SECTOR 34-A, CHANDIGARH. Smt.Romila Dubey, Chairperson Shri Gurinder Jit Singh, Member

PUNJAB STATE ELECTRICITY REGULATORY COMMISSION SCO NO , SECTOR 34-A, CHANDIGARH. Smt.Romila Dubey, Chairperson Shri Gurinder Jit Singh, Member PUNJAB STATE ELECTRICITY REGULATORY COMMISSION SCO NO. 220-221, SECTOR 34-A, CHANDIGARH Petition No.70 of 2014 Date of Order: 22.04.2015 Present: Smt.Romila Dubey, Chairperson Shri Gurinder Jit Singh,

More information

FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK,

FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM D-BLOCK, Case No. DH/CGRF-997/2015 Date of Institution: 09.01.2015 Date of Hearing: 06.02.2015 Date of Order: 06.02.2015 Before the, DHBVN. Present:- Sh. Daljit Singh, Chairman Sh. R.V.Bari, Member Sh. Satish Malik,

More information

M/s. Heer Enterprises - Applicant

M/s. Heer Enterprises - Applicant (A Govt. of Maharashtra Undertaking) CIN : U40109MH2005SGC153645 PHONE NO. : 25664314/25664316 Consumer Grievance Redressal Forum FAX NO. 26470953 Vidyut Bhavan, Gr. Floor, Email: cgrfbhandupz@mahadiscom.in

More information

NORTHERN POWER DISTRIBUTION COMPANY OF A.P. LIMITED WARANGAL

NORTHERN POWER DISTRIBUTION COMPANY OF A.P. LIMITED WARANGAL NORTHERN POWER DISTRIBUTION COMPANY OF A.P. LIMITED WARANGAL FORUM FOR REDRESSAL OF CONSUMER GRIEVANCES Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievances APNPDCL has been established as per Sub - Section (5)

More information

MAHARASHTRA ELECTRICITY REGULATORY COMMISSION

MAHARASHTRA ELECTRICITY REGULATORY COMMISSION Before the MAHARASHTRA ELECTRICITY REGULATORY COMMISSION World Trade Centre, Centre No.1, 13th Floor, Cuffe Parade, Mumbai 400 005 Tel. No. 022 22163964/65/69 Fax 022 22163976 E-mail: mercindia@merc.gov.in

More information

UTTAR PRADESH ELECTRICITY REGULATORY COMMISSION LUCKNOW. Notice dated U/s130 of Electricity Act2003.

UTTAR PRADESH ELECTRICITY REGULATORY COMMISSION LUCKNOW. Notice dated U/s130 of Electricity Act2003. UTTAR PRADESH ELECTRICITY REGULATORY COMMISSION LUCKNOW In the matter of : Notice dated 12.5.2007 U/s130 of Electricity Act2003. AND In the matter of : 1. Managing Director, U.P.Power Corporation Limited,

More information

SOUTHERN ELECTRICITY SUPPLY COMPANY OF ORISSA LIMITED

SOUTHERN ELECTRICITY SUPPLY COMPANY OF ORISSA LIMITED SOUTHERN ELECTRICITY SUPPLY COMPANY OF ORISSA LIMITED COMPLAINT HANDLING PROCEDURE OF DISTRIBUTION LICENSEE (APPROVED BY OERC) 1. This "Complaint Handling Procedure relating to Distribution Activity (Complaint

More information

Grievances No.K/DOS/015/874 of and No. K/DOS/016/875 of

Grievances No.K/DOS/015/874 of and No. K/DOS/016/875 of Consumer Grievance Redressal Forum, Kalyan Zone Behind Tejashree", Jahangir Meherwanji Road, Kalyan (West) 421301 Ph 2210707, Fax 2210707, E-mail : cgrfkalyan@mahadiscom.in Date of Grievance : 08/10/2013

More information

Maharashtra State Electricity Distribution Co. Ltd. s Consumer Grievance Redressal Forum Nagpur Urban Zone, Nagpur. Case No.

Maharashtra State Electricity Distribution Co. Ltd. s Consumer Grievance Redressal Forum Nagpur Urban Zone, Nagpur. Case No. Maharashtra State Electricity Distribution Co. Ltd. s Consumer Grievance Redressal Forum Nagpur Urban Zone, Nagpur Case No. CGRF(NUZ)/52/2012 Applicant : M/s. MPM Pvt.Ltd, M-22, MIDC, Hingna Road, Nagpur

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI: NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE Judgment pronounced on: I.A. No.13124/2011 in CS (OS) No.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI: NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE Judgment pronounced on: I.A. No.13124/2011 in CS (OS) No. IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI: NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE Judgment pronounced on: 07.03.2012 I.A. No.13124/2011 in CS (OS) No.1674/2011 SURENDRA KUMAR GUPTA Through Mr. J.S. Mann, Adv....

More information

Sangeeta Verma Secretary. No. Secy/ UPERC/Supply Code/ Lucknow: Dated Sir,

Sangeeta Verma Secretary. No. Secy/ UPERC/Supply Code/ Lucknow: Dated Sir, Uttar Pradesh Electricity Regulatory Commission Kisan Mandi Bhawan, II Floor, Gomti Nagar, Lucknow-226010 Phone 2720821 Fax 2720423 E-mail secretary@uperc.org Sangeeta Verma Secretary No. Secy/ UPERC/Supply

More information

MADHYA PRADESH ELECTRICITY REGULATORY COMMISSION BHOPAL

MADHYA PRADESH ELECTRICITY REGULATORY COMMISSION BHOPAL MADHYA PRADESH ELECTRICITY REGULATORY COMMISSION BHOPAL Subject: Dated: 7 th February, 2013 M/s Essar Power M. P. Limited DAILY ORDER (Date of Motion Hearing : 5 th February, 2013) Petition No.03/2013

More information

Through : Mr.P.V.Kapur, Sr.Advocate with Mr.V.K.Nagrath, Mr.Abhay Varma & Mr.Sidhant Kapur, Advocates.

Through : Mr.P.V.Kapur, Sr.Advocate with Mr.V.K.Nagrath, Mr.Abhay Varma & Mr.Sidhant Kapur, Advocates. IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : SUIT FOR RECOVERY RESERVED ON : 27th NOVEMBER, 2014 DECIDED ON : 11th DECEMBER, 2014 CS (OS) 1980/2011 & CC No.21/2012 SHIV SHAKTI MADAN... Plaintiff Through

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE. Dated of Reserve: July 21, Date of Order : September 05, 2008

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE. Dated of Reserve: July 21, Date of Order : September 05, 2008 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE Dated of Reserve: July 21, 2008 Date of Order : September 05, 2008 CM(M) No.819/2007 Rajiv Sud...Petitioner Through: Mr. Ravi Gupta

More information

FACTUAL NOTE IN RESPECT OF BHATHA LAND (BLOCK NO. 610) FOR WHICH NOTICE HAS BEEN PUBLISHED BY THE BANK FOR ITS SALE

FACTUAL NOTE IN RESPECT OF BHATHA LAND (BLOCK NO. 610) FOR WHICH NOTICE HAS BEEN PUBLISHED BY THE BANK FOR ITS SALE 1 FACTUAL NOTE IN RESPECT OF BHATHA LAND (BLOCK NO. 610) FOR WHICH NOTICE HAS BEEN PUBLISHED BY THE BANK FOR ITS SALE Against three mortgages of agricultural lands situated in villages Pal and Bhatha admeasuring

More information

Date of Filing:21/01/2009 Date of Order :.07/05/2009 BEFORE THE I ADDITIONAL DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM SESHADRIPURAM BANGALORE - 20

Date of Filing:21/01/2009 Date of Order :.07/05/2009 BEFORE THE I ADDITIONAL DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM SESHADRIPURAM BANGALORE - 20 Page 1 of 5 Date of Filing:21/01/2009 Date of Order :.07/05/2009 BEFORE THE I ADDITIONAL DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM SESHADRIPURAM BANGALORE - 20 Dated: 7 th DAY OF MAY 2009 PRESENT Sri.

More information

West Bengal State Electricity Distribution Company Limited

West Bengal State Electricity Distribution Company Limited West Bengal State Electricity Distribution Company Limited C:\ (SOP) regulation 2010.docAnnexure A1 Application form to be used for transfer of service/meter in case of change of ownership or occupancy

More information

NOTICE. MPERC (Establishment of Forum and Electricity Ombudsman for redressal of grievances of the consumers) Regulations, 2004

NOTICE. MPERC (Establishment of Forum and Electricity Ombudsman for redressal of grievances of the consumers) Regulations, 2004 NOTICE Bhopal, Dated 12th April,2004 No.1003/MPERC/2004.In exercise of the powers under sub-sections (5) (6) and (7) of section 42 read with clauses {r} and {s} of sub-section (2) of section 181 of the

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, 1908 RFA No.51/2012 DATE OF DECISION : 17th May, 2012

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, 1908 RFA No.51/2012 DATE OF DECISION : 17th May, 2012 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, 1908 RFA No.51/2012 DATE OF DECISION : 17th May, 2012 MS. KRITI KOHLI Through: Mr. Rao Balvir Singh, Advocate... Appellant VERSUS

More information

BIHAR ELECTRICITY REGULATORY COMMISSION

BIHAR ELECTRICITY REGULATORY COMMISSION BIHAR ELECTRICITY REGULATORY COMMISSION Vidyut Bhawan-II, J.L. Nehru Marg, Patna 800 021. Case No. 39/2016 IN THE MATTER OF:- PETITION UNDER SECTION 142 OF THE ELECTRICITY ACT, 2003 FOR NON COMPLIANCE

More information

FRANCHISING TOLL COLLECTION AT TOLL POINT TP-22 [UKLANA TOHANA MUNAK ROAD (NEAR PUNJAB BORDER)] FOR A PERIOD OF ONE YEAR I N D E X

FRANCHISING TOLL COLLECTION AT TOLL POINT TP-22 [UKLANA TOHANA MUNAK ROAD (NEAR PUNJAB BORDER)] FOR A PERIOD OF ONE YEAR I N D E X 1 FRANCHISING TOLL COLLECTION AT TOLL POINT TP-22 [UKLANA TOHANA MUNAK ROAD (NEAR PUNJAB BORDER)] FOR A PERIOD OF ONE YEAR I N D E X Sr. No Particulars SECTION-1 Page No i) Press Notice ii) iii) Detailed

More information

Suit No. : 570/15 13/01/2016. Counsel for the plaintiff. Counsel for the defendant.

Suit No. : 570/15 13/01/2016. Counsel for the plaintiff. Counsel for the defendant. Suit No. : 570/15 Counsel for the plaintiff. Counsel for the defendant. Vakalatnama filed by the counsel for the defendant alongwith WS. Copy given. Now put up for replication / documents / admission denial

More information

Supply shall generally be given at the following voltages on the basis of contracted load:

Supply shall generally be given at the following voltages on the basis of contracted load: Classification of Supply- Supply shall generally be given at the following voltages on the basis of contracted load: Consumers availing supply at lower voltage than above classification will be required

More information

BEFORE THE COMPLAINANT GRIEVANCE REDRESSAL FORUM B.E.S. & T. UNDERTAKING. Representation No. N-G(S) dtd. 25/06/2012 V/S

BEFORE THE COMPLAINANT GRIEVANCE REDRESSAL FORUM B.E.S. & T. UNDERTAKING. Representation No. N-G(S) dtd. 25/06/2012 V/S BEFORE THE COMPLAINANT GRIEVANCE REDRESSAL FORUM B.E.S. & T. UNDERTAKING (Constituted under section 42(5) of Electricity Act 2003) Ground Floor, Multistoried Annex Building, BEST s Colaba Depot Colaba,

More information

PUNJAB STATE ELECTRICITY REGULATORY COMMISSION SCO NO , SECTOR 34-A, CHANDIGARH

PUNJAB STATE ELECTRICITY REGULATORY COMMISSION SCO NO , SECTOR 34-A, CHANDIGARH PUNJAB STATE ELECTRICITY REGULATORY COMMISSION SCO NO. 220-221, SECTOR 34-A, CHANDIGARH Petition No.49 of 2013 Date of Order: 18.11.2014 In the matter of: Petition for proposal regarding inclusion of availability

More information

*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. + W.P.(C) No.2037/1992 & CM No.3935/1992 (for interim relief). Versus

*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. + W.P.(C) No.2037/1992 & CM No.3935/1992 (for interim relief). Versus *IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision: 20 th September, 2010. + W.P.(C) No.2037/1992 & CM No.3935/1992 (for interim relief). % SH. SATISH CHAND KAPOOR (DECEASED) THROUGH LR s Through:...

More information

Case No. 135 of Shri Vijay L. Sonavane, Member Smt. Chandra Iyengar, Member. (1) M/s B.S.Channabasappa & Sons...Petitioner 1

Case No. 135 of Shri Vijay L. Sonavane, Member Smt. Chandra Iyengar, Member. (1) M/s B.S.Channabasappa & Sons...Petitioner 1 Before the MAHARASHTRA ELECTRICITY REGULATORY COMMISSION World Trade Centre, Centre No1, 13th Floor, Cuffe Parade, Mumbai 400 005 Tel No 022 22163964/65/69 Fax 022 22163976 E-mail mercindia@mercgovin Website:

More information

I, son / wife of Sh., aged years, resident of House No., Sector, Chandigarh, do hereby solemnly affirm and declare as under :-

I, son / wife of Sh., aged years, resident of House No., Sector, Chandigarh, do hereby solemnly affirm and declare as under :- FORM - VII (AFFIDAVIT TO BE FURNISHED BY TRANSFERER FOR ADDITION OF NAME OF SPOUSE ON A NON-JUDICIAL STAMP PAPER OF RS. 3/- DULY ATTESTED BY MAGISTRATE IST CLASS) ------- I, son / wife of Sh., aged years,

More information

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR. S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No / 2016

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR. S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No / 2016 HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 6592 / 2016 1. Rajnikant S/o Shri Netrapal Sharma, Aged About 44 Years, R/o B-237, Karani Nagar, Lalgarh,

More information

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. versus. Through: 1. For the reasons stated in the application, delay of 61 days in refiling

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. versus. Through: 1. For the reasons stated in the application, delay of 61 days in refiling * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CS(OS) No.2711/2015 % 28 th October, 2015 SH. DEEPAK AGGARWAL Through:... Plaintiff Mr. Bhupesh Narula, Advocate. versus SH. RAJ GOYAL AND ORS. Through:... Defendants

More information

Government of West Bengal Backward Classes Welfare Department Writers Buildings, Kolkata Website:

Government of West Bengal Backward Classes Welfare Department Writers Buildings, Kolkata Website: Government of West Bengal Backward Classes Welfare Department Writers Buildings, Kolkata 700 001 Website: www.anagrasarkalyan.gov.in M E M O R A N D U M No. 1464 BCW/MR 59/10 Dated 30 th April, 2010 Guidelines

More information

HIMACHAL PRADESH STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD LIMITED MANUAL OF PRACTICES FOR HANDLING CONSUMERS COMPLAINTS NOTIFICATON

HIMACHAL PRADESH STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD LIMITED MANUAL OF PRACTICES FOR HANDLING CONSUMERS COMPLAINTS NOTIFICATON HIMACHAL PRADESH STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD LIMITED MANUAL OF PRACTICES FOR HANDLING CONSUMERS COMPLAINTS NOTIFICATON No HPSEBL/CE-(Comm.)/SERC-34/2013- Dated: - In pursuance to Regulation 7 & 8 of the HPERC

More information

REFERRED TO IN NOTE BEFORE THE RULE (IX) AND NOTE BELOW RULE 10.17)

REFERRED TO IN NOTE BEFORE THE RULE (IX) AND NOTE BELOW RULE 10.17) REFERRED TO IN NOTE BEFORE THE RULE 10.16 (IX) AND NOTE BELOW RULE 10.17) FORM OF AGREEMENT BOND TO BE EXECUTED AT THE TIME OF DRAWING AN ADVANCE BY A GOVERNMENT SERVANT FOR BUILDING ETC. OR HOUSE. An

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT :CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE. Crl. M.(C ) No. 1514/2007. Judgment reserved on: September 05, 2008

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT :CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE. Crl. M.(C ) No. 1514/2007. Judgment reserved on: September 05, 2008 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT :CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE Crl. M.(C ) No. 1514/2007 Judgment reserved on: September 05, 2008 Judgment delivered on: November 03, 2008 Suresh Jindal...

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE. Judgment reserved on: Judgment delivered on:

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE. Judgment reserved on: Judgment delivered on: IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE Judgment reserved on: 15.03.2011 Judgment delivered on: 18.03.2011 RSA No.243/2006 & CM No.10268/2006 SHRI.D.V. SINGH & ANR...Appellants

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE RC. REV. No.75/2014 DATE OF DECISION : 25th September, 2014

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE RC. REV. No.75/2014 DATE OF DECISION : 25th September, 2014 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE RC. REV. No.75/2014 DATE OF DECISION : 25th September, 2014 SMT. JAI SHREE LALLA Through: Mr. S.K. Singh, Advocate....Petitioner

More information

WEST BENGAL ELECTRICITY REGULATORY COMMISSION NOTIFICATION. NO. 46/WBERC Kolkata, the 31st May, 2010.

WEST BENGAL ELECTRICITY REGULATORY COMMISSION NOTIFICATION. NO. 46/WBERC Kolkata, the 31st May, 2010. WEST BENGAL ELECTRICITY REGULATORY COMMISSION NOTIFICATION NO. 46/WBERC Kolkata, the 31st May, 2010. In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) and clauses (za) and (zb) of subsection (2) of

More information

S.M.V. AGENCIES PVT. LTD. Through: Mr. Gagan Gupta and Mr. Saurabh Gupta, Advocates. Versus

S.M.V. AGENCIES PVT. LTD. Through: Mr. Gagan Gupta and Mr. Saurabh Gupta, Advocates. Versus IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE Date of decision: 11th April, 2013. CS(OS) 281/2010 & I.A. No.2055/2010 (u/o 39 R-1 & 2 CPC) S.M.V. AGENCIES PVT. LTD.... Plaintiff

More information

Application Form for New Connection

Application Form for New Connection 40 [ Application Form for New Connection Annexure 1 Photograph of the Applicant (For office use only) Name of Division Name of Sub-division Unique Application Number Date of receipt (To be filled by the

More information

No.MePDCL/D(D)/T-383(B)/ /6 Dated 6 th December 2016 OFFICE ORDER

No.MePDCL/D(D)/T-383(B)/ /6 Dated 6 th December 2016 OFFICE ORDER MEGHALAYA POWER DISTRIBUTION CORPORATION LIMITED OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR (DISTRIBUTION) LUM JINGSHAI, SHORT ROUND ROAD, SHILLONG 793001 : (0364) 2590289 Fax: (0364) 2591174 CIN: U40101ML2009SGC008394 No.MePDCL/D(D)/T-383(B)/2016-17/6

More information

Dos and Donts during the Assessment Proceedings

Dos and Donts during the Assessment Proceedings Dos and Donts during the Assessment Proceedings PRESENTED BY CA Atul C. Bheda FCA, LLB(GEN), DISA(ICA). Appearing Before AO Receiving Notice Check validity of notice with regard to (i) Section, (ii) Time

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CHANGE OF LAND USE MATTER Date of Decision: W.P.(C) 5180/2012

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CHANGE OF LAND USE MATTER Date of Decision: W.P.(C) 5180/2012 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CHANGE OF LAND USE MATTER Date of Decision: 25.04.2013 W.P.(C) 5180/2012 NEERA SHARMA... Petitioner Through: Mr S.K. Rungta, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Prashant

More information

DAKSHIN GUJARAT VIJ CO LTD. CIN U40102GJ2003SGC SURAT CITY CIRCLE

DAKSHIN GUJARAT VIJ CO LTD. CIN U40102GJ2003SGC SURAT CITY CIRCLE DAKSHIN GUJARAT VIJ CO LTD. CIN U40102GJ2003SGC042909 SURAT CITY CIRCLE An ISO 9001-2000 certified 2 nd floor, Opp. E-Space, Bhagvan Mahavir College Road, New VIP Road, Vesu-Bharthana, Surat - 395 007

More information

ACT, (Haryana Act No. 9 of 2006)

ACT, (Haryana Act No. 9 of 2006) 1 THE HARYANA SPECIAL ECONOMIC ZONE ACT, 2005 (Haryana Act No. 9 of 2006) No. Leg. 10/2006. - The following Act of the Legislature of the State of Haryana received the assent of the Governor of Haryana

More information

NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, NEW DELHI

NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, NEW DELHI NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, NEW DELHI Company Appeals (AT) No.101 to 105 of 2017 (arising out of Order dated 06.02.2017 passed by the National Company Law Tribunal, New Delhi in CP Nos. 16/152/2015,

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. Date of Judgment: Ex. F. A. No.18/2010 & CM No /2010 YOGENDER KUMAR & ANOTHER.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. Date of Judgment: Ex. F. A. No.18/2010 & CM No /2010 YOGENDER KUMAR & ANOTHER. IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE Date of Judgment: 05.07.2011 Ex. F. A. No.18/2010 & CM No. 18758/2010 YOGENDER KUMAR & ANOTHER...Appellants Through: Mr.Ved Prakash

More information

*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. % Date of decision:1 st December, 2009 M/S ANSAL PROPERTIES & INFRASTRUCTURE. Versus

*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. % Date of decision:1 st December, 2009 M/S ANSAL PROPERTIES & INFRASTRUCTURE. Versus *IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CM(M) No.807/2008. % Date of decision:1 st December, 2009 M/S ANSAL PROPERTIES & INFRASTRUCTURE LTD & ANR. Petitioner Through: Mr Prem Kumar and Mr Sharad C.

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : INDIAN PENAL CODE. Date of Decision: 12th November, 2007 CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 35 OF 1984.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : INDIAN PENAL CODE. Date of Decision: 12th November, 2007 CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 35 OF 1984. IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : INDIAN PENAL CODE Date of Decision: 12th November, 2007 CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 35 OF 1984 STATE Through: Mr. M.N.Dudeja, Advocate.Appellant Versus SHYAM SUNDER..Respondent

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION ACT, 1996 ARB.P. 63/2012 Date of Decision : December 06, 2012

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION ACT, 1996 ARB.P. 63/2012 Date of Decision : December 06, 2012 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION ACT, 1996 ARB.P. 63/2012 Date of Decision : December 06, 2012 M/S RURAL COMMUNICATION & MARKETING PVT LTD... Petitioner Through:

More information

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION. CRIMINAL APPEAL NO OF 2017 (Arising out of SLP(Crl.) No.

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION. CRIMINAL APPEAL NO OF 2017 (Arising out of SLP(Crl.) No. REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1534 OF 2017 (Arising out of SLP(Crl.) No.1439 of 2017) N. Harihara Krishnan Appellant Versus J. Thomas Respondent

More information

ELECTRICITY SUPPLY CODE REGULATION 2011 (WITH 1 st & 2 nd AMENDMENT)

ELECTRICITY SUPPLY CODE REGULATION 2011 (WITH 1 st & 2 nd AMENDMENT) TRIPURA ELECTRICITY REGULATORY COMMISSION ELECTRICITY SUPPLY CODE REGULATION 2011 (WITH 1 st & 2 nd AMENDMENT) North Banamalipur, Agartala, Tripura (W), PIN 799001 Phone (0381)-2326372 Webside : www.terc.nic.in

More information

Appointment of Internal Ombudsman (IO) For Redressal of Customer Grievance

Appointment of Internal Ombudsman (IO) For Redressal of Customer Grievance Appointment of Internal Ombudsman (IO) For Redressal of Customer Grievance Internal Ombudsman (Chief Customer Service Officer ) The Internal Ombudsman (Chief Customer Service Officer) has been appointed

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BANGALORE BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B.MANOHAR. Company Application No.682/2012 in Company Petition No.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BANGALORE BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B.MANOHAR. Company Application No.682/2012 in Company Petition No. IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BANGALORE DATED THIS THE 12 TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2014 BETWEEN: BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B.MANOHAR Company Application No.682/2012 in Company Petition No.43/2008 1. M/s.M.S.Marketing

More information

GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI OFFICE OF THE COMMISIONER OF INDUSTRIES 419, UDYOGSADAN, FIE, PATPARGANJ,DELHI -92

GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI OFFICE OF THE COMMISIONER OF INDUSTRIES 419, UDYOGSADAN, FIE, PATPARGANJ,DELHI -92 GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI OFFICE OF THE COMMISIONER OF INDUSTRIES 419, UDYOGSADAN, FIE, PATPARGANJ,DELHI -92 No. DCI/ILMAC/CI/2011/ I-t ~ 7- 'L - J'D. Dated: 81 ft I J Minutes of the meetina of the Industrial

More information

W.P.(C) No.5740 of 2001 P R E S E N T HON BLE MR. JUSTICE NARENDRA NATH TIWARI

W.P.(C) No.5740 of 2001 P R E S E N T HON BLE MR. JUSTICE NARENDRA NATH TIWARI BY COURT: 1 W.P.(C) No.5740 of 2001 (In the matter of an application under Articles 226 and 226 of the Constitution of India) Parmanand Pandey & Anr.. Petitioners. Versus The State of Jharkhand & Ors.....

More information

TRANSFER OF TELEPHONE CONNECTION TO THE LEGAL HEIRS AFTER THE DEATH OF THE ORIGINAL HIRER OF TELEPHONES

TRANSFER OF TELEPHONE CONNECTION TO THE LEGAL HEIRS AFTER THE DEATH OF THE ORIGINAL HIRER OF TELEPHONES TRANSFER OF TELEPHONE CONNECTION TO THE LEGAL HEIRS AFTER THE DEATH OF THE ORIGINAL HIRER OF TELEPHONES WHOM TO APPLY APPLY TO THE COMMERCIAL OFFICER (CENTRAL) MAHANAGAR TELEPHONE NIGAM LIMITED, NEW DELHI-110050

More information

The Orissa Electricity (Duty) Act, 1961.

The Orissa Electricity (Duty) Act, 1961. The Orissa Electricity (Duty) Act, 1961. An Act to levy a duty on the consumption of electrical energy on the State of Orissa. Be it enacted by the legislature of the State of Orissa in the Twelfth year

More information

No. TBD(A)3-1/2007 Dated Shimla-2 19 th March,2008

No. TBD(A)3-1/2007 Dated Shimla-2 19 th March,2008 Government of Himachal Pradesh Tribal Development Department No. TBD(A)3-1/2007 Dated Shimla-2 19 th March,2008 N O T I F I C A T I O N In exercise of the powers conferred by Rule- 9 of the Scheduled Tribes

More information

NATIONAL FERTILIZERS LIMITED (A GOVT. OF INDIA UNDERTAKING) NAYA NANGAL: FAX No

NATIONAL FERTILIZERS LIMITED (A GOVT. OF INDIA UNDERTAKING) NAYA NANGAL: FAX No NATIONAL FERTILIZERS LIMITED (A GOVT. OF INDIA UNDERTAKING) NAYA NANGAL: 140 126 FAX No.01887-220541 Phone No.0941712330 E-Mail: mlkhanna@nfl.co.in REF.NO.Mech/Urea/cont-21/ REGISTERED Dated: M/s Sub:

More information

The Bihar Gazette E X T R A O R D I N A R Y PUBLISHED BY AUTHORITY 20 PAUSH 1929(S) (NO. PATNA 27) PATNA, FRIDAY, 10TH JANUARY 2008

The Bihar Gazette E X T R A O R D I N A R Y PUBLISHED BY AUTHORITY 20 PAUSH 1929(S) (NO. PATNA 27) PATNA, FRIDAY, 10TH JANUARY 2008 REGISTERED NO. PT-40 The Bihar Gazette E X T R A O R D I N A R Y PUBLISHED BY AUTHORITY 20 PAUSH 1929(S) (NO. PATNA 27) PATNA, FRIDAY, 10TH JANUARY 2008 BIHAR ELECTRICITY [1] REGULATORY COMMISSION BIHAR

More information

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION. CIVIL APPEAL NO OF 2015 (Arising out of SLP (C) No of 2014) versus

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION. CIVIL APPEAL NO OF 2015 (Arising out of SLP (C) No of 2014) versus IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION REPORTABLE CIVIL APPEAL NO. 13361 OF 2015 (Arising out of SLP (C) No. 29621 of 2014) Rakesh Mohindra Anita Beri and others versus Appellant (s)

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : INDIAN EVIDENCE ACT, 1872 C.R.P. 589/1998. Date of Decision: 6th March, 2009

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : INDIAN EVIDENCE ACT, 1872 C.R.P. 589/1998. Date of Decision: 6th March, 2009 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : INDIAN EVIDENCE ACT, 1872 C.R.P. 589/1998 Date of Decision: 6th March, 2009 SURINDER KAUR Through: Petitioner Ms. Nandni Sahni, Advocate. versus SARDAR

More information

Judgment reserved on: November 22, 2010 Judgment delivered on: November 24, Through: Mr. Tarun Rana, Advocate

Judgment reserved on: November 22, 2010 Judgment delivered on: November 24, Through: Mr. Tarun Rana, Advocate * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment reserved on: November 22, 2010 Judgment delivered on: November 24, 2010 + CRL. M.C. NO.2172/2010 & CRL.M.A. No.8555/2010 DHANANJAY JOHRI Through: Mr.

More information

MANGALORE SPECIAL ECONOMIC ZONE MANGALORE AGENDA-- --AGENDA APPROVAL COMMITTEE MEETING (1 ST OF 2015) DATE : TIME : 11.

MANGALORE SPECIAL ECONOMIC ZONE MANGALORE AGENDA-- --AGENDA APPROVAL COMMITTEE MEETING (1 ST OF 2015) DATE : TIME : 11. MANGALORE SPECIAL ECONOMIC ZONE MANGALORE --AGENDA AGENDA-- 28 28 TH APPROVAL COMMITTEE MEETING (1 ST OF 2015) DATE : 18.02.2015 TIME : 11.30 AM VENUE: SEZ BHAVAN, WHITEFIELD, BANGALORE-66 1 Agenda Enclosed

More information

IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT. Case No: RSA 234/2015

IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT. Case No: RSA 234/2015 IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (The High Court of Assam, Nagaland, Mizoram and Arunachal Pradesh) Case No: 1. Shri Manik Chakraborty S/o late Bijoy Chakravorty R/o Rangapara Town, Ward No. 4, P.O. Rangapara,

More information

$~40 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

$~40 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI $~40 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CS(OS) 1738/2013 Judgment reserved on 10 th September, 2015 Judgment delivered on 23 rd September, 2015 HARISH CHAND TANDON Through:... Plaintiff Ms. Shalini

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. MAC App. No. 453 of Judgment reserved on:25th November, Judgment delivered on: 2nd December, 2008

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. MAC App. No. 453 of Judgment reserved on:25th November, Judgment delivered on: 2nd December, 2008 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI 1. Smt. Rani W/o Late Shri Jai Kumar Mittal SUBJECT : Motor Vehicle Act,1988 MAC App. No. 453 of 2008 Judgment reserved on:25th November, 2008 Judgment delivered

More information

F.No /2009-Appeal NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR TEACHER EDUCATION Hans Bhawan, Wing II, 1, Bahadurshah Zafar Marg, New Delhi /12/2009

F.No /2009-Appeal NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR TEACHER EDUCATION Hans Bhawan, Wing II, 1, Bahadurshah Zafar Marg, New Delhi /12/2009 F.No.89-651/2009-Appeal NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR TEACHER EDUCATION Hans Bhawan, Wing II, 1, Bahadurshah Zafar Marg, New Delhi - 110 002 17/12/2009 O R D E R WHEREAS the appeal of Abhivyakti College of Education

More information

INDEX. Sr. No. Particulars Page No.

INDEX. Sr. No. Particulars Page No. MAHARASHTRA ELECTRICITY REGULATORY COMMISSION Mumbai DRAFT Maharashtra Electricity Regulatory Commission (Standards of Performance of Distribution Licensees, Period for Giving Supply and Determination

More information

Law on Essential Commodities Act, 1955

Law on Essential Commodities Act, 1955 Law on Essential Commodities Act, 1955. S.S. Upadhyay Legal Advisor to Governor UP, Lucknow Mobile : 9453048988 E-mail : ssupadhyay28@gmail.com 1. Release of Vehicle under E.C. Act, 1955 : Where vehicle

More information

COURT NO. 3, ARMED FORCES TRIBUNAL, PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI T.A. No. 60 of 2010 Delhi High Court W.P (C) No. 621 of 2003

COURT NO. 3, ARMED FORCES TRIBUNAL, PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI T.A. No. 60 of 2010 Delhi High Court W.P (C) No. 621 of 2003 COURT NO. 3, ARMED FORCES TRIBUNAL, PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI T.A. No. 60 of 2010 Delhi High Court W.P (C) No. 621 of 2003 IN THE MATTER OF:...Applicant Through Shri P.D.P Deo counsel for the Applicant.

More information

(Please go through the Brochure, available on our website or at our Territory Offices carefully before filling this application form)

(Please go through the Brochure, available on our website or at our Territory Offices carefully before filling this application form) APPLICATION FORMAT Latest Passport Size Photograph with specimen signature on the photograph (Please go through the Brochure, available on our website or at our Territory Offices carefully before filling

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, 1908 RFA No.595/2003 Reserved on: 4th January, 2012 Pronounced on: 13th January, 2012 SHRI VIRENDER SINGH Through: Mr. R.C. Chopra,

More information

M/s. BLA Power Pvt. Ltd. - Petitioner. 4. M. P. Madhya Kshetra Vidyut Vitaran Co. Ltd., Bhopal -Respondents

M/s. BLA Power Pvt. Ltd. - Petitioner. 4. M. P. Madhya Kshetra Vidyut Vitaran Co. Ltd., Bhopal -Respondents MADHYA PRADESH ELECTRICITY REGULATORY COMMISSION BHOPAL Sub: In the matter of review petition filed by M/s BLA Power Pvt. Ltd. under section Petition No. 16 of 2015. Petition No. 35 of 2015 ORDER (Date

More information

KERC Guidelines, Electricity Act-2003 & Legal Issues

KERC Guidelines, Electricity Act-2003 & Legal Issues BANGALORE ELECTRICITY SUPPLY COMPANY LIMITED (wholly owned Government of Karnataka Undertaking) KERC Guidelines, Electricity Act-2003 & Legal Issues HRD Training Center, Crescent Towers, Crescent road,

More information

I have had the benefit of perusing the judgment of my. esteemed learned brother, Hon ble Justice Shri S.B. Sinha,

I have had the benefit of perusing the judgment of my. esteemed learned brother, Hon ble Justice Shri S.B. Sinha, TELECOM DISPUTES SETTLEMENT & APPELLATE TRIBUNAL NEW DELHI DATED 18 th JULY, 2011 Petition No. 275 (C) of 2009 Reliance Communications Limited.. Petitioner Vs. Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited..... Respondent

More information

BEFORE THE GUJARAT ELECTRICITY REGULATORY COMMISSION AT GANDHINAGAR PETITION NO OF 2017

BEFORE THE GUJARAT ELECTRICITY REGULATORY COMMISSION AT GANDHINAGAR PETITION NO OF 2017 BEFORE THE GUJARAT ELECTRICITY REGULATORY COMMISSION In the matter of: AT GANDHINAGAR PETITION NO. 1643 OF 2017 Petition for deciding the maintainability and admissibility under GERC (Conduct of Business)

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH BEFORE THE HON BLE MRS. JUSTICE RATHNAKALA. CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 2722/2009

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH BEFORE THE HON BLE MRS. JUSTICE RATHNAKALA. CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 2722/2009 1 R IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 11 TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2015 BETWEEN: BEFORE THE HON BLE MRS. JUSTICE RATHNAKALA CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 2722/2009 M/S.SHRIRAM TRANSPORT FINANCE

More information

Life Insurance Corporation of India Divisional Office, Jeevan Prakash Circuit house Road,Jodhpur PIN Ph

Life Insurance Corporation of India Divisional Office, Jeevan Prakash Circuit house Road,Jodhpur PIN Ph Life Insurance Corporation of India Divisional Office, Jeevan Prakash Circuit house Road,Jodhpur PIN-342011 Ph. 0291-2657815 Tender for Shifting of Policy Dockets and Racks from Jodhpur to RMF Center at

More information

THE KERALA TAX ON LUXURIES RULES, 1976

THE KERALA TAX ON LUXURIES RULES, 1976 THE KERALA TAX ON LUXURIES RULES, 1976 {INCORPORATING AMENDMENTS UPTO 2016} SRO No. 1273/76 - In exercise of the powers conferred by section 20 Kerala Tax on Luxury Act 1976 (32 of 1976) the Government

More information

THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CELLULAR OPERATORS ASS.O.I. & ORS. - Versus -

THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CELLULAR OPERATORS ASS.O.I. & ORS. - Versus - THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment delivered on: 15.01.2010 + W.P.(C) 583/2007 CELLULAR OPERATORS ASS.O.I. & ORS... Petitioner - Versus - NIVEDITA SHARMA & ORS... Respondent Advocates who

More information

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. + FAO(OS) No.534/2010 & CM Nos /2010. versus. % Date of Hearing : August 25, 2010

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. + FAO(OS) No.534/2010 & CM Nos /2010. versus. % Date of Hearing : August 25, 2010 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + FAO(OS) No.534/2010 & CM Nos.15238-40/2010 RAJ KUMAR BARI & ORS...Appellant through Mr. S.D. Singh & Mr. Rakesh Kumar Singh, Advs. versus SHIV RANI & ORS...Respondent

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : PUBLIC PREMISES (EVICTION OF UNAUTHORIZED OCCUPANTS) ACT, Date of decision: 8th February, 2012

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : PUBLIC PREMISES (EVICTION OF UNAUTHORIZED OCCUPANTS) ACT, Date of decision: 8th February, 2012 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : PUBLIC PREMISES (EVICTION OF UNAUTHORIZED OCCUPANTS) ACT, 1971 Date of decision: 8th February, 2012 WP(C) NO.11374/2006 OCEAN PLASTICS & FIBRES (P) LIMITED

More information

OPEN LETTER THE HON BLE CHIEF JUSTICE OF INDIA, APPEAL TO RESTORE THE RIGHTS OF THE TELECOM CONSUMERS IN THE COUNTRY AND OR FOR SUO MOTU

OPEN LETTER THE HON BLE CHIEF JUSTICE OF INDIA, APPEAL TO RESTORE THE RIGHTS OF THE TELECOM CONSUMERS IN THE COUNTRY AND OR FOR SUO MOTU 1 OPEN LETTER To THE HON BLE CHIEF JUSTICE OF INDIA, SUPREME COURT OF INDIA, TILAK MARG, NEW DELHI-110002. APPEAL TO RESTORE THE RIGHTS OF THE TELECOM CONSUMERS IN THE COUNTRY AND OR FOR SUO MOTU REVIEW

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE Date of Judgment: RSA No.46/2011

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE Date of Judgment: RSA No.46/2011 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE Date of Judgment: 10.3.2011 RSA No.46/2011 VIRENDER KUMAR & ANR. Through: Mr.Atul Kumar, Advocate...Appellants Versus JASWANT RAI

More information

O R D E R. AND WHEREAS the Council made the following observations:

O R D E R. AND WHEREAS the Council made the following observations: F.No.89-176/2009-Appeal NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR TEACHER EDUCATION Hans Bhawan, Wing II, 1, Bahadurshah Zafar Marg, New Delhi - 110 002 30/07/2009 O R D E R WHEREAS the appeal of Acharya Virag Sagar Vidhyapeeth

More information

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION. CIVIL APPEAL No.5517 OF 2007

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION. CIVIL APPEAL No.5517 OF 2007 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.5517 OF 2007 Nadiminti Suryanarayan Murthy(Dead) through LRs..Appellant(s) VERSUS Kothurthi Krishna Bhaskara Rao &

More information

IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT. (High Court of Assam, Nagaland, Mizoram and Arunachal Pradesh) M.F.A. No. 51 of 2014

IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT. (High Court of Assam, Nagaland, Mizoram and Arunachal Pradesh) M.F.A. No. 51 of 2014 IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (High Court of Assam, Nagaland, Mizoram and Arunachal Pradesh) M.F.A. No. 51 of 2014 1. M/S Jain and Associates registered Office at 9, Old Court, House Street, Kolkata- 700001.

More information

Guide to. Complaint Handling Procedure. and Other Consumer issues

Guide to. Complaint Handling Procedure. and Other Consumer issues Guide to Complaint Handling Procedure and Other Consumer issues 1 Table of Contents Sr. No. Description Page No. 1) Introduction 3 2) Right to Redress: Framework 4 3) Right to Redress: Mechanism and Relevant

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : SUIT FOR RECOVERY Date of decision: 17th July, 2013 RFA 383/2012. Versus

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : SUIT FOR RECOVERY Date of decision: 17th July, 2013 RFA 383/2012. Versus IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : SUIT FOR RECOVERY Date of decision: 17th July, 2013 RFA 383/2012 DESIGN WORKS Through: Mr. Kuldeep Kumar, Adv.... Appellant Versus ICICI BANK LTD... Respondent

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, DATE OF Decision : 18th January, 2012

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, DATE OF Decision : 18th January, 2012 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, 1908 RFA No. 40/2012 DATE OF Decision : 18th January, 2012 M/S SEWA INTERNATIONAL FASHIONS & ORS... Appellants Through : Md. Rashid,

More information

No.EDN-H(19)B(1)-6/ Promotion Directorate of Higher Education Himachal Pradesh. Dated Shimla th July,2012 OFFICE ORDER

No.EDN-H(19)B(1)-6/ Promotion Directorate of Higher Education Himachal Pradesh. Dated Shimla th July,2012 OFFICE ORDER No.EDN-H(19)B(1)-6/2010-11-Promotion 18.07.2012, Smt. Shashi Sood Sty.No. 6020 who has been promoted as Lecturer Pol.Science and posted in GSSS Bassi(BLP) is hereby adjusted at GSSS Lanj (KGR) against

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : EXCISE ACT, 1944 CENTRAL EXCISE ACT CASE NOS. 48/2012 & 49/2012 Date of decision: 2nd August, 2013

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : EXCISE ACT, 1944 CENTRAL EXCISE ACT CASE NOS. 48/2012 & 49/2012 Date of decision: 2nd August, 2013 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : EXCISE ACT, 1944 CENTRAL EXCISE ACT CASE NOS. 48/2012 & 49/2012 Date of decision: 2nd August, 2013 HINDUSTAN INSECTICIEDES LTD.... Appellant Through Mr.

More information

THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : COMPANIES ACT 1956 Judgment delivered on: 03.01.2013 WP(C) 668/2012 AND CM No.27/2013 (for directions) & CM No.9851/2012 (for directions) M/S. KLEN & MARSHALLS

More information

~Registrar General 2. The Ld. District & Sessio[ls Judge (HQ), High Court of -Delhi, New Deihl

~Registrar General 2. The Ld. District & Sessio[ls Judge (HQ), High Court of -Delhi, New Deihl DELH STATE LEGAL SERVCES AUTHORTY {Con:;tituted Under the 'Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987', an ;tel ojparjiamenl;' Under the Administl'ative Control of High Court of Delhi Central Office, Patia[a

More information

ANNEXURE I. In this procedure, unless there is anything repugnant in the subject or context:

ANNEXURE I. In this procedure, unless there is anything repugnant in the subject or context: ANNEXURE I STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURE FOR REGISTRATION AND DE- REGISTRATION OF APPROVED PERSONS AND OPENING BRANCH OFFICE BY BROKERS OF THE EXCHANGE IN TERMS OF REGULATION 5.8 OF GENERAL REGULATIONS

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : COMPANIES ACT, 1956 CRL.M.C. No. 179/2010 Judgment delivered on: 20th December, 2011

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : COMPANIES ACT, 1956 CRL.M.C. No. 179/2010 Judgment delivered on: 20th December, 2011 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : COMPANIES ACT, 1956 CRL.M.C. No. 179/2010 Judgment delivered on: 20th December, 2011 MOHAN LAL & ANR.... Petitioner Through : Mr. N.K. Kaul, Sr. Adv. with

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CHARTERED ACCOUNTANTS ACT, 1949 W.P.(C) 1345/2011 DATE OF ORDER :

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CHARTERED ACCOUNTANTS ACT, 1949 W.P.(C) 1345/2011 DATE OF ORDER : IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CHARTERED ACCOUNTANTS ACT, 1949 W.P.(C) 1345/2011 DATE OF ORDER : 14.03.2013 GUPTA AND GUPTA AND ANR Through: Mr. Sumit Thakur, Advocate.... Petitioners

More information