Denial of info is disservice

An electricity consumer complained that somebody has taken power connection in his name and wants to know the documents filed by him in support of application so that he could take action against the responsible people. Based on this power connection, he is claiming a share in the property. First, his wife filed an RTI application but died before getting information. Her husband asked whether any application has been made for new electricity connection on his address, if yes, then the name, address and other details of the applicant and a copy of the application made by the applicant.

The Delhi Vidyut Board was formed by the Government of National Capital Territory (NCT) Delhi in 1997 for the purpose of generation and distribution of power to the entire area of NCT of Delhi except the areas falling within the jurisdiction of NDMC and Delhi Cantonment Board. On July 1, 2002, the Delhi Vidyut Board (DVB) was unbundled into six successor companies, including the Discom - BSES Rajdhani Power Limited.

On its website, in its citizen charter (http://www.bsesdelhi.com/docs/pdf/Citizen-Charter_English_Single-Page.pdf), the Discom claims to have following vision: To deliver reliable and quality products and services to all customers at competitive costs, with international standards of customer care; To earn trust and confidence of all customers and stakeholders by exceeding their expectations and make the company a respected household name, etc. The organisation recognised the following Consumer Rights and obligations: An Applicant is a person who has applied for electric connection. Technical feasibility shall have to be examined for release of a connection. Connection can be sanctioned only if found to be feasible. Applicant shall become a bona fide consumer when connection is sanctioned, agreement signed and Energy Meter installed. A power thief is not a consumer.

The Discom also claimed to have devised a consumer-friendly procedure (according to the Delhi Electricity Supply Code and Performance Standards Regulations, 2007, Chapter-8) for dealing with complaints of consumers. That Code under Section 44 says: Complaint on consumer bills, i) In case of any complaint being filed, the Licensee shall acknowledge the consumer’s complaint immediately, if received in person, or within three days from the date of receipt if received by post; ii) If no additional information is required from the consumer, the Licensee shall resolve the consumer’s complaint and intimate the result to the consumer within fifteen days of receipt of the complaint. In case, if any additional information is required, the same shall be obtained, and the issue resolved and result intimated to the consumer within thirty days of receipt of the complaint. Till the complaint on the bill is resolved, the consumer shall pay the amount based on average consumption of last three consecutive undisputed bills. Amount so recovered shall be subject to final adjustment on resolution of the complaint.

In a (W.P.(C) NO. 10821/2009) Prof Ram Prakash vs BSES Rajdhani Power Ltd decided on 30 May, 2013, the Delhi High Court admitted a challenge by a consumer who received a huge bill of Rs 55,191 and tried to explain that there was no misuse of premises. Penalty was imposed on alleged misuse without giving a chance to represent. The inspecting team resorted to dubious means to extract higher revenue by classifying the petitioner’s premises under the misuse category. It is further submitted that the inspecting team of the respondent found the board titled at the petitioner’s premises as "Paying Guest Accommodation for Ladies" and mislabeled the said premises as "PG Hostel" and booked a case of misuse alleging "common office with kitchen" against petitioner.

The High Court has set aside the demand and remanded the matter back for passing a reasoned order after considering the objections. This is an example of the problems of consumers with the respondents and their response which is in total breach of so called Citizen Charter announced by the respondents, and also in breach of the Delhi Electricity Supply Code and Performance Standards Regulations, 2007.

The complainant has every legal right to know who is claiming connection in the name of his property. Consumer’s right to information is recognised by the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. Even assuming that respondent authority is not public authority as he claimed, he is provider of services to consumers, whose rights need to be honoured by him, and as per Section 2(f) of Right to Information Act, the information held by private body that can be accessed through state or regulatory, is the ‘information’.

Once what is sought is the ‘information’, the CIC gets legal authority to secure the same. Had respondent authority addressed the grievance reflected through the RTI application, there would have been no complaint at all. On denial of information, the complainant approached the Commission. The BSES Yamuna responded in writing on 19.2.2013. stating that there was a stay on CIC decision that DISCOMs were “Public Authority” by the High Court of Delhi in order 23.1.2007 in W.P. (Civil) No. 544/2007 (BSES Rajdhani Power Limited vs. CIC). Then they returned the postal orders without saying anything on the issue raised by the complainant. The Commission finds that the stay does not operate as a prohibition on the rights of the consumers for the information about services they are purchasing. Any service provider like electricity supplier cannot be so arrogant and adamant towards the rights of the consumers that it does not respond to problem even in a single sentence but spends huge money on hiring services of legal consultant or law firm or lawyer to deny the information to its own consumer. It is the misfortune of the consumers of the respondent authority that they are becoming victims of respondents.

The Commission observed that the respondents are abusing their powers under the guise of stay, which amounts to disrespect to the order of the High Court, to hide their disservice to consumers and denying the right to information of those consumers. The Commission summoned the PIO of Delhi Electricity Regulatory Commission and MD of Discom with relevant files to address the rights and grievances of consumer. Discoms have to respect consumer rights which include right to information also.

By: Madabhushi Sridhar