Sri Kanhei Charan Prusty, aged 55 years

S/o: Chaitnya Prusty,

Vill:Falapur, PO: Nadigaon, PS:Dhamnagar

Dist:Bhadrak

At Present: Village: Dakhinabada

PO:Dhamnagar, PS:Dhamnagar, Dist:Bhadrak

                                                         ……………………………Complainant

                     (Vrs.)

1.         Executive Engineer, South Division

            NESCO, Bhadrak, At: Aradi Chhak

            PO/PS/Dist:Bhadrak

2.         Sub-Divisional Officer, Electrical

            NESCO, Dhamnagar,

            At/PO/PS:Dhamnagar, Dist:Bhadrak

3.         Junior Engineer,Electrical NESCO,Dhamnagar

            At/PO:Dhamnagar, Dist:Bhadrak

                                                         …………………………..Opp.Parties

Order No.20 dt.18.03.2015:

            The case of the Complainant is that he is a BPL card holder under Dhamnagar G.P. and he has got his residential house in village Dakhinabada over his purchased land i.e. plot No.375 under Khata No.691/24. As a BPL card holder, the Complainant was selected under “RGGVY SCHEME” for electrification to his residential house at Dakhinabada by O.Ps. Accordingly, the name of Complainant finally published in the list i.e. ‘LIST OF BPL HOUSE HOLDS TO BE ELECTRIFIED UNDER RGGVY SCHEME IN BHADRAK DISTRICT PAGE-A”. The serial number of the Complainant in the list is 50 and his meter serial number is 703126. As per “RGGVY Scheme” the O.Ps provided electric connection to the residence of Complainant for about 4 to 5 months and thereafter without serving any electric bill and notice disconnected power supply to the residence of Complainant on 20.12.2013.  Complainant proceeded to the office of O.Ps several times and requested them for connection of electricity but the O.Ps refused saying that he is not a BPL card holder. As such the Complainant filed this case praying to direct the O.Ps to give electric supply to his house and for payment of litigation cost.

            O.Ps filed their written version stating that power supply was given to the premises of the Complainant under RGGVY scheme  basing on BPL list prepared by the Government. But the local villagers raised objection that how a BPL connection given to the premises, where another connection was there. The concerned J.E.(Elect.), Dhamnagar made an enquiry and came to know that one existing service connection was there in the name of Bhagirathi Sahoo, Dakhinabada bearing consumer No.DG-25431 having arrear amounting to Rs.1,05,529.48 upto December,2013. Power supply was disconnected due to non-payment of arrear and at the time of breakdown of transformer at Dakhinabada. Besides the above findings, it was found that the Complainant named as Sri Kanhei Charan Prusty, S/o: Sri Chaitanya Prusty, PO: Nadigaon had been residing in that premises since long by changing his name as Bhagirathi(Nick name) in village of Dakhinabada. In fact, there was an old woman  named Puni Sahoo having no offspring adopted  the Complainant Kanhei Charan Prusty as a step son for her livelihood and the Kanhei named as Bhagirathi in Dakhinabada village. After confirming the fact that the premises where the Complainant has managed to obtain permission to avail electricity as a BPL consumer in the said premises there was another connection and arrear electricity bill not cleared, power supply was disconnected.

            Heard the Ld.Counsel for Complainant and the authorized representative of O.Ps.  At the time of hearing of the case on 26.11.2014, it was submitted on behalf of O.Ps that  one existing service connection was there in the name of Bhagirathi Sahoo bearing consumer No.DG-25431 having arrear of Rs.1,05,529.48 upto December,2013 as well as Bhagirathi Sahoo and present Complainant Kanhei Charan Prusty is one and same person. Complainant disputed this fact. Accordingly, the O.Ps were directed to produce documents showing that the Complainant and Bhagirathi Sahoo is same and one person. Further, the O.Ps were also directed to produce documents to the aforesaid arrear, from which date it stands in the name of Bhagirathi Sahoo by the next date. However, after four adjournments, the case was heard finally on 03.03.2015 from the Ld.Counsel for Complainant and authorized representative of O.Ps. Admittedly, power supply has been disconnected to the premises of Complainant on 20.12.2013 . After giving sufficient opportunity to the O.Ps they have  failed to prove their case by adducing documents as per order dt.26.11.2014 that Bhagirathi Sahoo bearing consumer No.DG-25431 who had arrear electricity charges of Rs.1,05,529.48 upto December,2013  fradulently managed to get electric connection under RGGVY scheme changing his name to  Kanhei Charan Prusty or in other word Bhagirathi Sahoo and Kanhei Charan Prusty is the  same  person. On the other hand to substantiate his case, the Complainant has filed Xerox copy of documents in the name of Kanhei Charan Prusty, such as  photo identity card, Adhar Card, BPL Card No.453, list of BPL Households to be electrified under RGGVY scheme, Xerox copy of Mutation Khata No.691/24 under Mouza Dakhinabad etc..

            Under the above facts and circumstances, of the case we are convinced that the O.Ps have disconnected the power supply to the premises of the Complainant on hearsay with malafide intention defeating the beneficial scheme of the Government which amounts to deficiency in service. Accordingly, we direct the O.Ps to restore power supply to the premises of the Complainant within 7 days of receipt of this order, failing which they shall be liable to pay compensation @ 100/- per month to the Complainant after 30 days of receipt of this order till restoration of power supply is made. The O.Ps are directed to pay litigation cost of Rs.500/- to the Complainant, which may be adjusted in the future bills of the Complainant.