The old meters nowadays is being replaced by WBSEDCL with a digital meter with an electronic display encased in a transparent fiber box. The whole set up is sealed by the WBSEDCL persons only; hence no control of the consumer is possible. Inside the fiber box, there is one round seal covering the remote controlled sensor which calculates the meter reading. This set up is checked, calibrated and sealed by the manufacturing company. The WBSEDCL persons is tampering the seals, manipulating the meter sensor and resealing using WBSEDCL seal. This practice is unfair as the manufacturing company seals the sensor window for manipulation of any kind by both the distribution company and the consumer. Before sealing they calibrate the meters and a calibration certificate is issued by the manufacturer. But WBSEDCL is breaking the seal, putting their own seal and recalibrating it for increased billing, for which there is no calibration certificate.

Similarly, it may so happen, in high probability, that, to make up for the increased units, they are decreasing the rate at which the meter should rotate for some people against monetary benefits. Otherwise, how will they justify the total electricity distributed against the total electricity consumed?

This is the story of Dilip, Please read till the end:

Dilip Kumar Roy is a poor man from Bishar Para area of North 24 Parganas, West Bengal. He and his wife works as tailors and after relentless hard work of more than thirty years has built a small house of their own. They have two sons. The elder one, 28 years old is unemployed and helps Dilip in his tailoring jobs. The younger son, 18 years old has passed higher secondary exam this year.

Dilip is a consumer of electricity supply provided by WBSEDCL. Dilip in course of consumption of electricity supply possesses a Consumer No. H 100770, Pole No. H/10/336.

On 29.11.2011 Dilip with a view to change the place of stationing of existing electric meter at his residence on a wall beside the right side of the main entrance door which is 2 feet in length and 1 and 1/ 2 feet Width, a room outside the staircase situated beneath the roof, collected the required prescribed forms from the office of WBSEDCL and thereafter filled up the said forms and submitted the same with the office of WBSEDCL in the mid of December 2011. It was also mentioned that even if the main entrance door remains closed the officials could be able to take monthly meter reading from outside.

In a matter of few days after such submission of forms in the office of WBSEDCL the officials came for inspection of the proposed place of changing the stationing of the existing electric meter of Dilip.

The officials of WBSEDCL at the time of inspection initially refused to change the place of existing electric meter at the place proposed by Dilip. To which Dilip intimated such fact to the office of the Station Manager, ES, WBSEDCL, Birati, where he was informed it to be the work of the relevant technical department where one Mr. Gouranga Dutta was in-charge and sent Dilip to him.

Thereafter Mr. Gouranga Dutta caused further inspection and sent quotation papers to the residence of Dilip along with a demand of Rs.318/- (Rupees three hundred and eighteen only) which Dilip paid on 02.01.2012 and such payment was duly received and accepted the by WBSEDCL. Not only that, Dilip also purchased the goods for executing such change with the view that his job would be done by WBSEDCL.

Dilip thereafter on each and every Monday visited the office of WBSEDCL to enquire when such work would be done but every time Dilip was turned away by citing some reasons or the other. Such delay prevented Dilip to further do some constructional work at his premises which caused him mental agony and monetary loss.

After passage of couple of days visiting the office of WBSEDCL Dilip on 19th March 2012 met Mr. Gouranga Dutta who on perusal of the papers of Dilip contacted another Mr. Dutta of call centre of Birati Kalyan Co-operative and told Dilip to meet him. Dilip met the said Mr. Dutta who after perusal of the papers and complaint of Dilip contacted one Mr. Anil Mondal and. informed Dilip that they would again go for an inspection and would inform him when the said work would be done. On that very day Mr. Anil Mondal visited the residence of Dilip and prescribed certain goods needs to be purchased to do such work which Dilip had already bought by that time.

On 27th March 2012 Dilip after not getting any cogent reply from the side of the officials of WBSEDCL, visited their office and informed such facts all over again and got the phone number of the said Mr. Dutta and after calling him, was informed that Mr. Anil Mondal would look after the matter and such work would be done by him. Thereafter Dilip contacted Mr. Anil Mandal who delayed the matter for one week. After another but such work was not done by WBSEDCL for reasons best known to them.

Dilip on 16.05.2012 informed such fact in detailed writing to the Station Manager, which was received on 07.06.2012 but no reply from the end of the WBSEDCL was received by Dilip till date.

On 16.07.2012 Dilip intimated the entire series of fact before the Regional Manager, ES, WBSEDCL, Barrackpore in writing where Dilip mentioned about his aforesaid experience and also expressed the tremendous mental agony suffered by the gross deficiency in service by all the aforesaid parties which prevented him to construct the boundary wall and the materials bought by complainant which got damaged due to such callousness and deficiency in service of WBSEDCL; The Regional Manager, on receipt of such letter remained silent thereby proving the deficiency in service beyond all reasonable doubt.

After getting no response from the opposite parties over a period of one year, Dilip went to the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, North 24 Parganas at Barasat on 27.12.2013 and discussed the issue with the Head Assistant (Bara Babu) who immediately (at about 3.30 pm.) talked over phone with Mr. Gouranga Dutta and asked Dilip to meet him for redressal. Dilip on that date met Mr. Dutta who assured immediate action.

Accordingly on 30.12.2013 at noon Mr. Gouranga Dutta along with other 3-4 persons came to the house of complainant for inspection and in the afternoon on that date New Meter (No. B2262460) was fixed by 4/ 5 persons replacing the old meter with noting of Final Reading of old meter 5265 and that of New Meter reading 000000 in the yellow Meter Reading Card.

Next meter reading was taken on 20.03.2014 with noting of 498 in the meter reading card. But having received no bill (as other consumer in the neighborhood had received the bill by that time) Dilip went to the office of the Station Manager on 08.04.2014 and enquired the aspect when Sri Gouranga Dutta took the yellow meter reading card and added 68 units more with existing reading of 498 units. Mr. Dutta told Dilip that the bill would be sent within few days.

On 14.04.2014 Dilip received the bill for total 566 units (498 New Meter Reading + 68 for old meter). But in the old meter prior to fixing of new meter, Dilip paid bill with meter reading 5251 as on 19.12.2013. While fixing new meter the meter reading in old meter was noted 5265 in the card. So the actual consumption in old meter from 19.12.2013 to 30.12.2013 would be 14 units (5265-5251). But the WBSEDCL has added 68 units instead of actual 14 units.

Moreover, the consumption of units in New Meter from 30.12.2013 to 20.03.2014 was noted for 498 units which appears to be too high (almost ten times) in comparison to the quarterly consumption in previous years despite no increase in consumption points. Dilip uses some CFL Bulbs of 5, 8, 18, 23 watts, one TV and 2/3 Fans that too occasionally. Next bill for the period from March to May, 2014 is 385 units which also appears to be very high.

Dilip brought this fact of abnormal high reading of New Meter to the Regional Manager, Station Manager and Technical Officer requesting to initiate proper enquiry for redressal of his grievance of over billing and replacement of new meter and also for rectification of units consumed in old meter from noted 68 units to actual 14 units and in high reading of new meter too.

On 15.06.2014 another bill came, now for Rs.2341/- for 385 units. Although the petitioner understood that there was some error in the calculations without prejudice to his rights, he paid a total sum of Rs.5690/- on 23.06.2014 for the last 2 bills. Another sum of Rs.100/- was also charged by the Electricity Authorities despite there being no actual disconnection or reconnection.

On 23.07.2014 the petitioner wrote another letter to the Station Manager, claiming over billing and demanding redressal by testing of the meter, replacing of the same and refund of the amounts wrongly and decisively billed.

On 13.09.2014 another bill came, now for Rs.4100.80 for 658 units. The petitioner made a payment of Rs.1350/for the first month on 24.09.2014. But, as there was no reply for his redressal of his legitimate grievances, he stopped making payment on such erroneous bills.

On 13.12.2014 a bill came for Rs.5731/for 661 units.

As the petitioner has refused to pay till he got a reply or redressal, the WBSEB disconnected the supply on the said meter 28.01.2015. As a result, he had to suffer from terrible inconvenience.

Although the Electricity Authorities gave no reply or redressal to the petitioner’s just claims and legitimate grievances, without prejudice to his rights, the petitioner was compelled to pay on 30.01.2015, Rs.5791/in lieu of the due and Rs. 100/- as reconnection charges to secure reconnection.

He was not able to deposit any further money. He installed three meters at his own cost in the wall marking them with paper strips. After few days he found out that the WBSEDCL meter reading is way more than the three meters installed who were giving normal reading and are equal but much low than the WBSEDCL meter.

He filed a case in the consumer court on 12.03.2015 since complaining to the electricity office yielded no result. Upon receiving the summon from the honorable court, Station manager accompanied by technical officer and 5 others visited his house on Wednesday, 25.03.2015. He showed them everything, including the readings taken on the other three meters. They noted everything, expressed a little sympathy and left.

After 6 months. The honorable court decided in Dilip’s favor on 04.08.2015, mentioning in his judgment that the power distribution company failed to submit proper documents including the meter testing report. They also failed to submit any statement by the consumer as well. Hence the distribution company failed to provide satisfactory service to the consumer, moreover charged him exorbitantly in blatant violation of the norms. Also the reading for the consumer should not be more than 100 to 105 units and not 566,385,658 and 661. The court also directed the distribution company to issue fresh bill considering the court’s directive within one month from the date of issue of the judgment (04.08.2015). The distribution company was supposed to comply with the court order within by 04.09.2015 but failed to do so.

But they disconnected his electrical connection on 18.09.2015, the day of the Biswakarma puja.

When he showed them the court order they blatantly disregarded the same and cussed, and asked Dilip to show it in court only since that was a court order. The incident left him and his wife at tremendous mental agony. His wife failed to suffer this agony and fell ill due to the oppressive heat without the electricity and had to be administered saline (2 bottles). She also failed to regularly continue her seamstress work due to disconnection of service. Dilip’s younger son was about to write the 12th standard examination and it was Dilip’s dream to provide him a better education in college but due to the disconnection of power he was able to secure only 45% marks in his board exam, safe to conclude that he could have got more if the electrical connection was available.

Failing to get any reprieve from this situation, Dilip had to resort to State Consumer Forum on 21.09.2015. The hearing was on 17.02.2016. WBSEDCL gave a standard reply to the court that the line was disconnected since the bill payment was not received. Dilip’s lawyer also put forward my status mentioning that his younger son is approaching the H.S exam. The court ruled and asked the power distribution company to send all the bills afresh after recalculating and asked Dilip to submit 50% of the bill amount within 17.03.2016. The line will be restored immediately.

But WBSEDCL failed to produce the bill within that date, in fact would it have been so, his son would have been able to study a day or two before the exam under lights. The bill finally reached on 23.03.2016 and Dilip went to deposit 50% of the bill on 28.03.2016. There also he was forced to pay Rs.100/-, since the payment was made allegedly “late”. The late fee was totally absurd since the bill was delivered to his house only on 22.03.2016 at 3.00pm duly received by his son (D.L.Roy). As I was in his tailoring shop and also consulting with his lawyer, which was necessary for the disputed bill, it is not humanly possible to pay the bill by 22.03.2016.The connection was restored however after the payment was made that very day.

Dilip Kumar Ray, being a bonafide citizen and sufferer of this system, started to investigate the root cause of the problem and came up with the following:

The old meters nowadays is being replaced by WBSEDCL with a digital meter with an electronic display encased in a transparent fiber box. The whole set up is sealed by the WBSEDCL persons only; hence no control of the consumer is possible. Inside the fiber box, there is one round seal covering the remote controlled sensor which calculates the meter reading. This set up is checked, calibrated and sealed by the manufacturing company. The WBSEDCL persons is tampering the seals, manipulating the meter sensor and resealing using WBSEDCL seal. This practice is unfair as the manufacturing company seals the sensor window for manipulation of any kind by both the distribution company and the consumer. Before sealing they calibrate the meters and a calibration certificate is issued by the manufacturer. But WBSEDCL is breaking the seal, putting their own seal and recalibrating it for increased billing, for which there is no calibration certificate.

Similarly, it may so happen, in high probability, that, to make up for the increased units, they are decreasing the rate at which the meter should rotate for some people against monetary benefits. Otherwise, how will they justify the total electricity distributed against the total electricity consumed?

All the relevant evidence of this whole procedure are available and Dilip is willing to provide all the proofs if asked for.

Dilip had filed a GD at Nimta P.S on 18.09.2015 on the day of disconnection of his electricity connection. He is entitled to get refund of a huge amount if the date of beginning of the process, 29.11.2011 is considered till date.

The distribution company is tampering the original meter, generating falsified inflated bills and forcing the bonafide poor consumers like Dilip to pay more. If any of the consumers is showing the guts to protest against this atrocity, he or she has to face the music.

Recently a report was published in Anadabazar Patrika (Sunday, 29.05.2016) to this effect showing the discrepancy in those meters.

Dilip is putting up hoardings and doing street corner movement alone for the benefit of the people. But he needs more of us beside him in his fight against corruption and raising awareness.

I am here by attaching a photo of the tampered meter along with as a proof of my complaint.

Dilip’s family kept themselves confined within their home due to this incident for a long time and have even though of giving up their lives at one point of time thinking of the financial and mental loss that the WBSEDCL forced them to go through.

In view of the above, I hereby request you humbly to investigate the matter from inside out and arrange to provide the people of Bengal reprieve.