Snapped power supply lines have often caused death and destruction in different parts of the country, eliciting strong condemnation from the law courts and the consumer courts. In fact some years ago, when ten people were seriously injured as a result of the snapping of an eleven KV power line in Hapur, even the National Human Rights Commission had been provoked into ordering an interim relief of Rs 10,000 to each of the injured, in addition to directing the Uttar Pradesh State Electricity Board to take disciplinary action against the officials in charge of the maintenance of the line. Expressing shock, the NHRC had commented that the Board had been grossly negligent, almost bordering on recklessness.

Yet, cases of such recklessness continue to come up before the courts. In fact, what is apparent in most of these cases is the service providers’ callous indifference to consumer complaints about dangerous, live wires left unattended in public places and on private properties.

A recent order of the apex consumer court highlights a similar attitude to consumer complaints. In this case, the consumer court has directed the UP State Electricity Board and the power supply undertaking in Kanpur (KESCO) to recompense the consumer. The compensation amount of Rs 1.75 lakh carries with it an interest of six per cent to be calculated from the date of filing the complaint (1992) till the date of payment. It has also awarded costs of Rs 5,000 to the consumer. The incident goes back to 1991. On November 10, a high tension wire passing in front of Rajendra Kumar Tripathi’s house snapped and fell on the road and later came in contact with the low tension wire supplying power at 220 volts to his house.

This suddenly jacked up the voltage resulting in the destruction of all electrical gadgets and even the internal wiring in Tripathi’s house. An assistant engineer who visited the house confirmed the incident, but KESA did not respond to his pleas for compensation. Eventually, Tripathi contacted the district collector, who in turn asked the tehsildar to assess the loss.

The service provider, however, was unwilling to accept the report of its own assistant engineer as well as the assessment of loss made by the tehsildar. Brushing aside these objections, the apex consumer court held the electricity board as well as KESA accountable for the damage caused to the consumer. Hopefully, orders such as these will make the electricity supply undertakings more safety conscious and responsible.