BEFORE THE DISTRICT FORUM:KURNOOL
Present: Sri.K.V.H. Prasad, B.A., LL.B President
And
Smt. C.Preethi, M.A.LL.B., Lady Member
Wednesday the 4th day of March, 2009
C.C.No.165/08
Between:
S.Krishna, S/o.Late S.Sankarappa,
H.No.45/24/R54-20A, Sri Krishna Colony, Ashok Nagar, Kurnool-3. … Complainant
Versus
- The Commissioner, Municipal Corporation,
H.S.No.1134, Kurnool-4.
2. The S.E. Engineering Section, Municipal Corporation,
H.S.No.1134, Kurnool-4.
3. Assistant In charge of Citizen Service Centre, Kurnool Municipal Corporation,
H.S.No.1134, Kurnool-4. … Opposite parties
This complaint is coming on this day for orders in the presence of Sri.Ch.Sudhakar Reddy, Advocate, for the complainant, and Sri.D.Yella Reddy , Advocate, for the opposite parties and upon perusing the material papers on record, the Forum made the following.
ORDER
(As per Sri. K.V.H.Prasad, President)
C.C.No.165/08
1. This case of the complainant is filed U/S 12 of C.P.Act seeking an award on the opposite parties 1 and 2 to pay to the complainant Rs.29,100/- as compensation for delay of 582 days in giving tap connection to the house of the complainant , Rs.30,000/- towards mental agony suffered by the complainant at the conduct of the opposite party , Rs.30,000/- towards deficiency of service alleging his applying for tap connection to his house bearing No. 45/24-R – 54 -20A of SriKrishna Colony , Ashok Nagar, Kurnool on 29-05-2006 paying Rs.1210/- vide D.D.No. 238177 , but the opposite parties giving tap connection on 12-02-2008 i.e, with a delay of 582 days , while the tap connection is to be provided within 30 days of the receipt of the application and in default there of for said lapse to compensate the applicant at Rs.50/- per each day thereafter till connection is given . The complainant further alleges that the opposite parties gave evasive and false reply to the notice dated 29-02-2008 of the complainant demanding the compensation for delayed days at Rs.50/- per day .
2. In pursuance of the receipt of the notice of this forum as to this case of the complainant the opposite parties caused their appearance through their counsel and contested the case filling written versions seeking dismissal of complainants case with cost and denying any liability of theirs to the complainants claim.
3. The written version of the opposite party No. 1 , adopted by opposite parties 2 and 3 , even though admit the fact of complainant applying for tap connection paying Rs.1200/- under a D.D. dated 29-05-2006 and the legal notice of the complainant , but deny the other averments of complaint and any of their deficient conduct in providing tap connection and any of their liability to compensate the complainant as claimed alleging that the complainant applying for tap connection under scheme meant for people of below poverty level possessing white ration
card with an income not exceeding Rs.28,000/- p.a and the complainant enclosing to his application a white ration card pertaining to the house No. 41-524-B of Kothapeta of Kurnool as against the applied house No. 45/24-R-54 -20 –A and the non compliance of the complainant in furnishing correct ration card inspite of request of the opposite party to that effect till 1-2-2008 on which day the complainant filed a notarized affidavit dated 20-01-2008 of his , alleging himself as tenant to the house bearing No. 41-524-B of Kothapet and his shifting from there to his own house bearing No. 45/24-R-54 -20-A of Srikrishna Colony and there on satisfying the said affidavit , the opposite party giving tap connection to the complainants house there on and so the delay in giving tap connection is not due to any negligency or deficiency or fault on the part of the opposite party . It further submits that the stipulation of 30 days for providing tap connection mentioned in form No. 3 ( Ex.A2) is meant for applicants of general category who pay Rs.6,000/- per tap connection and applicants of O. Y. T category who pay Rs.10,000/- per tap connection and not to applicants of white ration card who apply for tap connection under B.P.L category paying Rs.1200/- as the applications for tap connections sought under B.P.L category will be disposed purely on seniority basis .
4. In substantiation of the contentions while the complainant side has taken reliance on documentary record in Ex.A1 to A6 besides to his sworn affidavit, the opposite party side has taken reliance on documentary record in Ex.B1 to B10 besides to the sworn affidavits of opposite parties .
5. Hence the point for consideration is whether the complainant has made out any negligency or deficiency on the part of the opposite parties to hold their liability to the complainants claim.
6. The Ex.A1 is the Xerox copy of the application of complainant for tap connection to the house bearing No. 45-24R -54-20-A of Srikrishna Colony of Kurnool . It envisages payment of Rs.1210/- by complainant vide Ex.A3 / B3 – Xerox of D.D.No. 238177 dated 29-05-2006 for domestic tap connection besides to a declaration of complainant to abide
to the terms and conditions of by-laws as to consumption of supplied water and payment of consumption bills for supplied water . The said fact is not being in dispute from the opposite party side the Ex.A1 remains proved of its contents .
7. The Ex.A4 is the house tap connection sanction order signed for opposite party No. 1 on 07-02-2008 . It envisages that the sanction of tap connection was given to the complainants house covered in Ex.A1 and A2 , under B.P.L tap scheme and the Ex.B9 – the Xerox of G.O.Ms.No. 303 M.A & U.D Department dated 03-08-2003 in its para No. 3 ( 1) also says the House Service Connection (HSC) shall be given to any below poverty line house hold possessing a white ration card on payment of Rs.1200/- . The Ex.B10 – Xerox of G.O.Ms.No. 158 M.A. & U.D. Department dated 25-01-2001 in its para 4 at Sl.No. 3 of its table prescribes for sanction of water supply house service connection a time limit of 30 days to applicants aspiring under general category and 10 days to applicants aspiring under O.Y.T.category . As the application of the complainant for water supply house service connection being under B.P.L scheme paying Rs.1200/- , and the agreement for sanction of tap connection in Ex.A4 was also executed by the complainant envisaging payment of Rs.1200/- under B.P.L scheme and the order for assessment report in Ex.B7 and B8 also appears to have been given under B.P.L scheme and the house tap connection sanction order in Ex. A4 also mentioning the said sanction was given under B.P.L scheme for Rs.1200/- , the nature of the house tap connection applied and got by the complainant remains undoubtedly as one of B.P.L scheme only and none other while the Ex.A6 endorsement dated 10-03-2008 of Superintendent Engineer of opposite party No. 1 , in reply to Ex.A5 legal notice of the complainant corroborates the same besides saying what were the charges collectable for the HSC under O.Y.T and general category and B.P.L category and no time limit of B.P.L tap connection . Hence there appears any merit in the contentions of the complainant as to any time limit for its sanction and for claiming Rs.50/ per day for 582 days especially when the said connection of the complainant are inconsistent to the time stipulated in Ex.B9 , B10 G.Os.
8. The Ex.B1 xerox of house hold ration card on the name of S.Lakshmi Bai , showing the complainant as her son , for the house No. 41-524-B of Kothapeta of Kurnool . As the tap connection applied by the complainant under B.P.L scheme being for the house No. 45/24-R-54 -20-A and so the Ex.B1 -house hold card remains as one for the other house number other than applied for by the complainant. That is why the complainant was directed by the opposite party for placing the house hold ration card pertaining to the house number for which tap connection was applied by complainant under B.P.L scheme, especially when the endorsement of the card issuing officer on the back of Ex.B1 says the change of door number in complainants ration card could be carried out in the month of June, 2006 i..e, soon after installation of service providers to the computers by NIC NET .
9. As the house service connection of tap under B.P.L scheme shall be given to white house hold card holders on payment of prescribed fee of Rs.1200/- and not on mere basis house tax payment receipts, the Ex.B2/B6 xerox of tax payment receipt for the house No. 45/24/R/54/20 A serves any useful purpose to the complainants case as satisfies the requirement for sanctioning house service tap connection under B.P.L scheme.
10. Further from the Ex.B5 xerox of the complainant’s notarized sworn affidavit dated 20-1-2008 it appears that the complainant has not satisfied the tap sanctioning authority till then as to the inconsistency in house numbers between house number in ration card and house number for which tap connection was applied . In the absence of any time stipulation for sanction of tap connection applied under B.P.L scheme there appears any lapsive , lethargic , negligent or deficient conduct of the opposite party in taking up necessary steps and proceedings in Ex.B4
, B7 , B8 and Ex.A4 in furtherance of providing tap connection to the complainant house consequent to Ex.B5 .
11. In the above state of circumstances the case of the complainant against the opposite parties remains to be frivolous and there appears any entitleness to the complainant for his claim at the liability of the opposite parties and so there being any merit and force in the case of the complainant it is dismissed with cost.
Dictated to the stenographer, transcribed by her, corrected and pronounced
by us in the open bench on this the 4th day of March, 2009.
Sd/- Sd/-
MEMBER PRESIDENT
APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE
Witnesses Examined
For the complainant :Nil For the opposite parties :Nil
List of exhibits marked for the complainant:-
Ex.A1. Xerox copy of application for tap connection to the house.
Ex.A2. Acknowledgement in form-3.
Ex.A3. Xerox copy of bankers cheque for Rs.1210/-.
Ex.A4. Tap sanction order in form – 7.
Ex.A5. Office copy of legal notice dated 29-02-2008 along with
acknowledgement.
Ex.A6. Endorsement dated 10-03-2008.
List of exhibits marked for the opposite parties:
Ex.B1. Xerox copy of house holders card having endorsement
On the back side dated 18-04-2006.
Ex.B2. Xerox copy of tax payment receipt dated 30-12-2005.
Ex.B3. Xerox copy of banker cheque dated 29-05-2006 for Rs.1210/-.
Ex.B4. Tap agreement for tap sanction in form – 2.
Ex.B5. Xerox copy of affidavit of the complainant dated 20-01-2008 submitted to opposite party.
Ex.B6. Account copy of property tax receipt dated 03-10-2007.
Ex.B7. Note dated 01-02-2008 for having assessment report for
Sanction of house tap.
Ex.B8. Form-5 directing the A.E to submit his report.
Ex.B9. Xerox copy of G.O.M.S.No.303 dated 03-08-2004.
Ex.B10. Xerox copy of G.O.M.S.No.158 MA dated 25-01-2001.
Sd/- Sd/-
MEMBER PRESIDENT
// Certified free copy communicated under Rule 4 (10) of the
A.P.S.C.D.R.C. Rules, 1987//
Copy to:-
Complainant and Opposite parties
Copy was made ready on :
Copy was dispatched on
