Adv. For the Complainant: -  Sri P.K.Mishra  and Others

Adv. For O.P                         :-  Sri B.Sathpathy

 Date  of filing of the Case  :-17.07.2018

Date of Order                       :-17.08.2020

 ORDER

 Sri A.K.Purohit, President

1.       The case of the complainant is that, a 11 KV electrical line is passing over the roof of the complainants residential house where she is residing with her family. The said electrical line is touching a major portion of the ground floor of the complainants house which is danger to the life of the complainant and her family members. To this the complainant has represented before the O.Ps. several times but except sending a estimate for shifting the 11 KV line vide letter No. 5893(3) dated 11.12.15 the O.Ps. have not taken any step for shifting the electric line. Lastly again on dated 1.7.20 the complainant represented the O.P. but no action has taken by the O.P. for shifting the said line. Hence the complaint.

2.         The O.Ps. have contested the case by filing their version jointly. Besides preliminary objection the O.Ps. have submitted that, the line in question was constructed under REC scheme of Govt. of India when the power distribution system was with erstwhile OSEB and the complainant has constructed her in contravention to the safety measures provided under the Indian Electricity Rules. The O.Ps. have further submitted that safety questions for any installations are to be raised before the designated authority which the complainant has never raised any objection before the said authority. The O.Ps. have admitted that in response to the estimate for shifting the line the complainant had deposited Rs.1740/- towards supervision charges and submitted that the works are to be done by the complainant by engaging a valid licensed electrical contractor which is a part of the contract and the complainant has not completed her part of contract. The O.Ps. have denied all the allegations of the complaint and claims dismissal of the case.

3.          Since the  O.Ps. have filed their version and the case is ready for final hearing the case is heard on merit and finally disposed of and the interim petition has not been heard separately.

4.         Heard both the parties. Perused the documentary evidence available on record. It is submitted on behalf of the complainant that since there is danger to the life of the complainant and his family members it is necessary to shift the 11 KV line. On the other hand the learned advocate for the O.Ps. submitted that since the estimate is an old one a fresh estimate is required for shifting the line as per the present market rate and for shifting the line a report is necessary  to know whether there is possible way to shift the line or not.

5.         The Electricity Act 2003 is a consumer friendly statute and it has been held in judicial pronouncement that electricity is a goods. ( Reference may be made to Civil Appeal No. 1672 of 2020 arising out of SLP No.5190 of 2019, Asst. Engineer Ajmer Vidyut Vitaran Nigam Vrs. Rahamatulla Khan.) It is a right of the consumer to protest against hazardous goods and services under the consumer Protection Act. Service includes supply of electrical or other energy as defined in the Consumer Protection Act. Hence the complainant can maintain a consumer complaint for electrical services which are hazardous to her life and property. Accordingly this consumer complaint is maintainable.

6.           In Para 6 of their written version the O.ps. have admitted that an amount of Rs.51055/- was estimated for the shifting of 11 KV line  and they have already received Rs 1740/- from the complainant towards supervision charges vide money receipt No. 586142 dated 13.1.16. This fact itself shows that the 11 KV line is touching the residential house of the complainant which is danger to the life of the complainant and requires shifting of the same. This fact also shows that there is possible way to shift the electrical line and hence there is no requirement of asking for any further report. Since the complainant had deposited the supervision charges it is believed that she has already complied with the requirements of Law and Rules and after receipt of the charges non shifting of the line by the O.P. amounts to deficiency in service on the part of the O.Ps. It is not understood why the O.Ps. have not taken any step for shifting the line since 2016 although they have received the supervision charges. The O.Ps. have not produce any believable evidence to show that there is reason for non shifting the line.

7.          Under the aforesaid discussion and material available on record it is concluded that there is danger to the life of the complainant due to touching of the 11 KV line to her residential house and the O.Ps. are liable to shift the same without creating any harm to other consumers.

                                                                                    ORDER

The O.Ps. are directed to shift the 11 KV line touching the residential house of the complainant without creating any harm to other consumers at the cost of the O.Ps. within one month from the date of receipt of this order. There shall be no order as to litigation cost.

Accordingly the case is disposed of.

Order pronounced in the open Forum to-day the 17^th day of  August’ 2020.                                   

                                                                Sd/-                                                                       Sd/-                                                            

                                                            (S.Rath)                                                             (A.K.Purohit)  

                                                           MEMBER.                                                             PRESIDENT