O R D E R Sri. Santhosh Kesavanath P., President. Case of the petitioner is as follows: Petitioner is a member of the Pampadi Grama Panchayath. Petitioner availed a water connection from the opposite party. According to the petitioner since the house of the petitioner is in a high elevation petitioner is not getting water. Petitioner had given a notice to the opposite party for disconnection. As per the request of the petitioner water connection was disconnected. According to the petitioner there is no dues at the time of disconnection. Opposite party issued a notice on 21..2..2008 demanding an amount of Rs. 4,419/- as arrears of water charges. Petitioner states that the said bill is without any basis and there is no mentioning of from which period the petitioner is a defaulter. According to the petitioner the bill issued is not legal. Act of the opposite party is a clear deficiency in service. So, the petitioner prays for cancellation of the bill for an amount of Rs. 4419/-. Petitioner also claims cost and compensation. Opposite party entered appearance and filed version contenting that the petition is not maintainable. According to the opposite party on 13..6..2007 water connection of the petitioner was disconnected due to non payment of water charges. Before disconnecting the water connection several notices were given to the petitioner but the petitioner never made any positive response and was not ready to pay arrears at the time of disconnection. Petitioner is liable to pay an arrear of Rs. 4,419/- as water charges. According to the opposite party the bill issued is legal and there is no deficiency in service on their part. So, they pray for dismissal of the petition with their costs. Points for determinations are: i) Whether there is deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party? ii) Relief and costs? Evidence in this case consists of affidavit filed by both parties and Ext. A1 to A documents on the side of the petitioner and Ext. B1 to B5 documents on the side of the opposite party. Point No. 1 Crux of the case of the petitioner is that notice issued to the petitioner dtd: 21..2..2008 is not legal and without any basis and is to be cancelled. Even though the opposite party contented that bill issued is legal but they have not produced any document to prove how they come to the conclusion that petitioner is liable to remit an amount of Rs. 4,419/- as arrear of water charges. In the present case opposite party water authority has not produce any scrap of paper to prove the basis of disputed bill. The aforesaid omission amounts to deficiency in service. Point No. 2 In view of the finding in point No. 1 petition is allowed in part. The notice dtd: 12..2..2007 for an amount of Rs. 4419/- is cancelled. Opposite party will be at liberty to issue a bill for the water actually consumed by the petitioner. Petitioner shall be intimated about the basis of the calculation of the bill. There will be no order as to cost. Order shall be complied with within one month of the receipt of this order. Dictated by me transcribed by the Confidential Assistant corrected by me and pronounced in the Open Forum on this the 17th day of July, 2010. Sri. Santhosh Kesavanath P. President Sd/- Smt. Bindhu M. Thomas, Member Sd/- Sri. K.N. Radhakrishnan, Member Sd/- APPENDIX Documents for the Petitioner Ext. A1: Letter to A.E Water Authority Dtd: Nil Ext. A2: Letter to A.E Water Authority Dtd: Nil. Documents for the Opposite party Ext. B1: Copy of relevant page of register Dtd: 25..8..97 Ext. B2: Copy of relevant page of register dtd: 16..7..2000 Ext. B3: Copy of relevant page of register dtd: 21..2..2006 Ext. B4: Copy of relevant page of register dtd: 18..12..2002 Ext. B5: Copy of relevant page of register dtd: 19..2..2002 By Order,
| | HONORABLE Bindhu M Thomas, Member | HONORABLE Santhosh Kesava Nath P, PRESIDENT | HONORABLE K.N Radhakrishnan, Member | | 
