BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES

REDRESSAL FORUM, JALANDHAR.

Complaint No.407 of 2016

Date of Instt. 21.09.2016

Date of Decision:12.04.2017

Prabhjit Singh S/o Bikar Singh, R/o Mindha Kalan District Jalandhar, Jalandhar. ..........Complainant

Versus

Asstt. Executive Engineer, Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd, Sub Division Rurka Kalan Distt. Jalandhar Tel.LL. 01826276043 .........Opposite party

Complaint Under Consumer Protection Act.

Before: Sh. Karnail Singh, (President),

Sh. Parminder Sharma (Member)

Present: Sh. DK Sharma, Adv. Counsel for complainant.

Sh. Rajat Chopra, Adv. Counsel for OP.

Order

Karnail Singh (President)

1. This complaint filed by complainant, wherein alleged that the complainant is agriculturist engaged in growing vegetables and had taken electricity Tube Well Connection No.AP-21/856F under Drip System. It is water sprinkler connection which works on the principle of Fountain for watering the vegetables. The complainant has suffered in the growing and marketing of vegetables. The loss has gone up to Rs.5 1/2 lacs. The complainant is facing difficulty in clearing the loan of the bank in this behalf. The complainant can neither use this connection for growing crops nor transfer this connection for some other business.

2. That Punjab Government provides Tube Well Connection from its Chairman Quota to needy persons. The complainant has got sanctioned Priority Tube Well Connection from its Chairman Quota. The Scheme provides for installation of electric Connection on priority basis for Agricultural Consumers. It could be given to them having land holding up to 5 Acres. The complainant should not have any other Tube Well connection in State of Punjab. The complainant is eligible for Priority Connection as he fulfills the conditions in this behalf. Since only one connection is available to Agriculture Consumer, therefore the complainant has given an application for taking away the connection already existing with him i.e. AP-21/856F as stated supra and in its place provide new connection. The OP had got deposited Rs.20,000/- against receipt No.29113 Book No.48986 dated 30.05.2016 for installation of Tube Well Connection on priority basis. The OP instead of providing new connection on priority basis, has come to disconnect earlier connection immediately and consider installing the new connection later on implying thereby that the complainant will remain without electric connection for a period of more than one month which will cause him immeasurable loss in agriculture. Under the facts and circumstances, the complainant has offered to have his earlier connection cut or withdrawn or cancelled to obtain new connection for 10 BHP Power Motor and has also given latter to this effect. Since the condition of granting only one connection in this behalf is met by his offer, the opposite party is dilly dallying in providing Priority Connection for agriculture. The OP is required to provide the Connection on priority basis and after having provided and made functional the OP be pleased to cut or withdraw the earlier connection No.AP21/856/F, may be simultaneously, if possible.

3. That the OP cannot refuse to provide him above connection given the above circumstances for demand invoice has been issued and complied with. The complainant is consumer and electricity supply is service provided under the act against consideration deposited with the opposite party and accordingly the instant complaint filed with the prayer that the OP may be directed to install the Tube Well connection for agriculture purpose as sanctioned from its Chairman Quota in priority basis.

4. Notice of the complaint was given to opposite party and accordingly OP filed a reply and contested the complaint by taking preliminary objections that at the outset, the OP denies each and every averments and allegations made in the complaint save and extent to what is specifically admitted hereinafter, the complainant has suppressed material fact from this Forum and complaint is liable to be dismissed on this short ground. The complainant applied for this Tube Well connection exclusively for the purpose of earning livelihood. He is not a consumer under the Act. So, on this ground only the complaint of the consumer may be dismissed. It is further averred that the complainant is estopped by his own act, conduct, admission from filing the present complaint and complainant did not came to this Forum with clean hands and even the complainant is having no locus standi to file the present complaint and further alleged that no cause of action has accrued to the complainant against the OP and further submitted that this complaint is incomplete and does not mention the correct and proper facts, history of the case as the complainant is suppressing the material facts from this Forum. It is pertinent to mention herein that the complainant is already having a Tubewell connection bearing number AP21/856F in the name of the complainant at the time when application for the installation was made by the complainant and regarding this a notice was sent to the complainant bearing No.429/30 dated 09.06.2016 and bearing memo number 831 dated 05.09.2016 and as per rules of the PSPCL only one connection shall be admissible in any of the priority categories and as such the complaint of the complainant is liable to be dismissed and in reference to this further referred para No.13.7 Regulation of Priorities for Agriculture Consumers. On merits, all the allegations made in the complaint are categorically denied and lastly prayed that the complaint of the complainant is without merit and same may be dismissed.

5. In order to prove the case of the complainant, the learned counsel for the complainant Sh. DK Sharma, Adv tendered into evidence affidavit of complainant Ex.CW1/A alongwith documents Ex.CA and Ex.CB and closed the evidence on behalf of the complainant.

6. Similarly, Counsel for the OP tendered into evidence affidavit Ex.OP1/A alongwith some other documents Ex.OP1 to Ex.OP10 and closed the evidence of the OP.

7. We bestowed our thoughtful consideration to the submission made by learned counsel for the respective party and also scanned the file very minutely with the able assistance of both the counsel for the party.

8. After considering the over all circumstances as elaborated in the pleading as well as orally submitted by learned counsel for the party, it reveals that the priority basis connection of the complainant is sanctioned from Chairman Quota, is not denied by OP rather the OP took a simple plea that the said priority tubewell connection from Chairman Quota is not installed in the field of the complainant as he has already having one Tubewell connection bearing No.AP-21/856F and if the second connection on priority basis is installed in the field of the complainant then it is directly violation of regulation of priority for agriculture consumers i.e. 13.7.

9. We find the plea taken by the OP is not sustainable because we have gone through the said 13.7 regulation and find that wording of the said regulation states that only one connection shall be admissible in any of the priority category, it means one farmer/consumer is not eligible to get twicely Tubewell connection from priority category. But the case in hand having not identical facts because it is not case of the OP that the previous connection of the complainant is also on the basis of any priority category, it is pertinent to mention here that the previous connection of the complaint has been already disconnected. So in any manner, the case of the complainant is not fall under 13.7 Regulation of priority for agriculture consumer and moreover if the case of the complainant is debarred by regulation 13.7 then why the complainant was allowed to deposit the security amount of Rs.20,000/- which is admittedly accepted by the OP. So, under these circumstances we find that the OP has wrongly, illegally decline vide letter Ex.OP2 dated 05.09.2016 for installation of electricity Tubewell to the complainant.

10. In the light of above detailed discussion, the complaint of the complainant is partly accepted and OP is directed to install in running condition electricity Tube Well connection in the field of the complainant from Chairman Quota in priority basis, within one month from the date of order. Complaint could not be decided within stipulated time frame due to rush of work.

11. Copies of the order be supplied to the parties free of cost, as per Rules. File be indexed and consigned to the record room.

Dated Parminder Sharma Karnail Singh

12.04.2017 Member President