Orissa

Kendrapara

CC/53/2022

Rabindra Nath Biswal - Complainant(s)

Versus

B.D.O.,Marshaghai Block - Opp.Party(s)

Sri Prahallad Mahali

18 Oct 2023

ORDER

OFFICE OF THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,
KENDRAPARA, ODISHA
 
Complaint Case No. CC/53/2022
( Date of Filing : 11 Oct 2022 )
 
1. Rabindra Nath Biswal
S/o- Late Natabar Biswal At-Podana Po-Pikarali Ps-Patkura Dist-Kendrapara
Odisha
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. B.D.O.,Marshaghai Block
At/Po- Marshaghai Ps-Patkura Dist-Kendrapara
Odisha
2. Social Education Officer,
Marshaghai Block At/Po- Marshaghai Ps-Patkura Dsit-Kendrapara
Odisha
............Opp.Party(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MR. Pravat Kumar Padhi PRESIDENT
 HON'BLE MR. Bibekananda Das MEMBER
 
PRESENT:
 
Dated : 18 Oct 2023
Final Order / Judgement

MR. BIBEKANANDA  DAS, MEMBER:-         

                     Complainant who is a Senior Citizen and BPL Cardholder and beneficiary of  “Madhu Babu Pension Yojana”. Being aggrieved by non-payment old age pension after May, 2022 has filed the present C.C.Case seeking direction to release the arrear pension along with compensation of Rs. 1 Lakh for mental agony and litigation expenses cost. Notice to Ops was issued and theBlock Development Officer(B.D.O), Garadpur (Op No.1) has filed reply vide letter No. 4792 dt. 28.10.2022 stating therein that the Complainant/beneficiary of village Podana under Raghabpur Gram Panchayat is not under  Gradapur Block area.

                       In the office record, notices and in all copies the B.D.O. Garadpur is made as Opp. party but surprisingly in the first complaint’s copy in the cause title Garadpur has been deleted and in that place Marshaghai is written without permission of this Commission. The Counsel for Complainant is absent since dt. 16.12.2022 and watching the proceeding sitting over the fench.

                       Complainant was a beneficiary of Madhubabu Pension Yojana in which no consideration was paid and as how Complainant is a consumer has not been explained in absence of paying any consideration, complainant cannot be termed as a consumer as defined U/s-2(7) of C.P.Act, 2019.

            We therefore find no merit in the present C.C.Case and also this case is not maintainable die to non-joinder of parties and as such the C.C.Case No. 53/2022 is hereby dismissed. No order as to cost.

                                Issue extract of the order to the parties concerned.   

           Pronounced in the open Commission, on this the 18th   day of October,2023.            

                              I, agree

                                     Sd/-                                                       Sd/-

                                PRESIDENT                                      MEMBER

 
 
[HON'BLE MR. Pravat Kumar Padhi]
PRESIDENT
 
 
[HON'BLE MR. Bibekananda Das]
MEMBER
 

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.