Deficiency in service by electricity utility for prolonged delay in releasing connections led to limited reduction of relief.

A public utility electricity board that invites applications, accepts deposits, and then withholds supply for years after compliance with demand notice formalities breaches its statutory and public law duty to act fairly, reasonably, and within the time limits stated in its own circulars and regulations. The prolonged failure to release connections, without timely reasons for delay, amounts to deficiency in service under consumer law. Relief for the delayed service was justified, but the monetary award required moderation in light of the later release of connections and the overall circumstances. The findings of deficiency were sustained, while interest and compensation were reduced.

---

---

Issues: (i) whether the electricity board committed deficiency in service by failing to release connections within the prescribed and reasonable time despite compliance with demand notice formalities; (ii) whether the direction awarding interest and compensation required modification.

Issue (i): whether the electricity board committed deficiency in service by failing to release connections within the prescribed and reasonable time despite compliance with demand notice formalities.

Analysis: The supply of electricity is a public utility function and the board, though not strictly governed by section 22 of the Indian Electricity Act, 1910, was still under a statutory and public law duty to supply energy fairly, reasonably, and within the time indicated in its own circulars and regulations. The governing circulars and regulations contemplated release of connections within a fixed period after compliance with the demand notice, subject only to practical constraints, and also required disclosure of reasons for delay. The prolonged non-release of connections for years, without compliance with these requirements, amounted to failure to perform the statutory duty and brought the case within deficiency in service under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

Conclusion: The finding of deficiency in service was upheld and was against the appellant.

Issue (ii): whether the direction awarding interest and compensation required modification.

Analysis: While the consumer fora were justified in granting relief for the prolonged denial of service, the facts warranted some moderation of the monetary relief in view of the subsequent release of connections and the overall circumstances. The board could not retain the benefit of the deposits without rendering service, but the quantum of interest and compensation was adjusted to meet the ends of justice.

Conclusion: The award of interest and compensation was modified by reducing interest to 9% per annum and compensation to Rs. 5,000 each.

Final Conclusion: The appeals failed in substance, and the consumer fora's findings were sustained with limited modification of the monetary relief.

Ratio Decidendi: A public utility or deemed licensee that invites applications and retains deposits must supply electricity within a reasonable time and in accordance with its own governing circulars and regulations, failing which the delay constitutes deficiency in service under consumer law.

---