with a sanctioned load of 86.60 KW. The petitioner had been paying all the bills regularly. In the month of October-2011, the meter became defective. Intimation in this regard was sent to the Corporation and the bills were duly paid by the petitioner on an average basis from 12.11.2011 to 12.07.2013. He contends that the defective meter was not changed within the prescribed statutory period and was finally changed in the month of February, 2013 and even thereafter, the respondent-Corporation continued to send bills on an average monthly consumption basis instead of recording the actual meter readings. He submits notwithstanding that there was no lapse or error on the part of the petitioner-Institution, the respondent-Corporation issued a memo No.75 dated 15.02.2016 and memo No.124 dated 17.02.2016, both of which were received on 24.02.2016, thereby claiming an amount of Rs.8,24,000/from the petitioner on account of the alleged difference of meter reading recorded at Pg. No.7 CT ratio 200/5 and meter ratio 100/5 and further the account of the petitioner was overhauled with effect from March-2013 to December-2013. A representation was submitted by the petitioner to the Chief Engineer, Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd., Border Zone, Amritsar seeking permission to deposit part of the disputed amount of Rs.8,24,893/- and to refer the matter to the Zonal Dispute Settlement Committee. The electricity supply to the school was restored on such deposit but no reference was made to the Zonal Dispute Settlement Committee. Instead, vide letter dated 19.10.2016, the petitioner was directed to file an appropriate petition before the Consumer Grievances Redressal
