DATE OF FILING                    :     02.09.2014.

DATE OF S/R                            :      04.03.2015.

DATE OF FINAL ORDER      :     17.06.2015.  

Rajendra Prasad,

son of late Sarju Das

of  9, Dharmadas Ganguly Lane, P.S. Shibpur,

District Howrah…………………………………………………………COMPLAINANT.

• Versus -

  District Engineer,

  CESC Ltd.,

  of 433/1, G.T. Road,

  Howrah – 711101. ……………………………………………………OPPOSITE PARTY.

   

                                                  P    R    E     S    E    N     T

   

               Hon’ble President  :   Shri  B. D.  Nanda,  M.A. ( double ), L.L.M., WBHJS.

                                 Hon’ble Member      :      Smt. Jhumki Saha.

              Hon’ble Member : Shri A.K. Pathak,  L.l.b., ( Retired Railway Officer ).         

                                                   F  I   N   A    L       O   R   D    E     R

   

• 1. This is an application U/S 12 of the C.P. Act, 1986 filed by the petitioner, Rajendra Prasad, praying for a direction on the CESCAuthority, o.p., to provide new connection in the name of the petitioner at his premises no. 9, Dharmadas Ganguly Lane, P.S. Shibpur, Howrah, wherein he is a premises tenant with common user of bath and privy at the ground floor at a monthly rental ofRs. 121/- p.m. according to english calendar and wherein the landlord had an agreement with developer who constructed a multi storied building and the petitioner got back one room in the premises but without any electric connection resulting filing of the case.

   

• 2. The o.p., District Engineer, CESC Ltd., contested the case by filing a written objection denying some allegations made in the claim petition and admitting that the petitioner applied for domestic supply at his premises no. 9, DharmadasGanguly Lane, P.S. Shibpur, Howrah, and they made inspection on 11.03.2014 and found that there was unauthorized use of electricity and amounting toRs. 3,60,662/- out of which Rs. 2,20,622/- remaining unpaid and as per notification of West Bengal Electricity Regulatory Commission for recovery of arrears they cannot supply new connection and cannot be blamed for gross negligence or deficiency in service.
• 3. Upon pleadings ofparties the following points arose for determination :

1. Is the case maintainable in its present form ?

2. Whether the petitioner has any cause of action to file the case ?

3. Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of the O.P.,

   CESC Ltd. ?

4. Whether the complainant is entitled to get any relief as prayed for ?

DECISION  WITH   REASONS      :

4. All the issues aretaken up together for the sake of convenience and brevity for discussion. On scrutiny of the case record as well as the respective case of the parties along with documents and also herein the submission of the ld. counsels this Forum finds that it is the admitted case of the parties that the petitioner applied for a new connection in the new house wherein he got back one room and in the demolished premises he had one room wherein he was a tenant. Now the o.p. says that unless the huge lakhs of money not recovered they could not provide electric connection to the petitioner. There is no evidence coming from the o.p. that the petitioner had specific electric connection wherein there was huge consumption pending in the name of the petitioner and until the said payment is made they are not liable to give any fresh connection. In the absence of any such document any denial of electricity to a common man in the modern days is nothing but an arbitrary act on the partof the o.p., who are legally bound to provide such electric connection to the petitioner, who applied before them and an inspection was also made by them. Further if there is any dues from the petitioner then the o.p. has liberty to realize such amount from the petitioner legally by adopting legal process and not denying a new connection to him who had no such connection earlier in the said house.

In the result, the claim succeeds.

Court fee paid is correct.

      Hence,     

           O     R     D      E      R      E        D               

      That the C. C. Case No. 484 of  of 2014 ( HDF 484 of 2014 )  be  and the same is allowed on contest without   cost    against  the O.P., CESC Ltd. 

      The  petitioner is entitled to get electric connection and the  O.P., District Engineer, CESC Ltd., of 433/1,  G.T . Road, Howrah 1, is directed to provide new electric connection at the premises of the petitioner of 9, Dharmadas  Ganguly Lane, P.S. Shibpur, Howrah,  within 30 days from the date of this order.

      As regards compensation, no award made as petitioner get his main relief.

      The  o.p. is directed to comply of the aforementioned order within the stipulated time failing the petitioner would be at liberty to put the final order  in execution.  

      Supply the copies of the order to the parties, as per rule.            

DICTATED  &    CORRECTED

BY   ME.  

  (    B. D.  Nanda   )                                              

  President,  C.D.R.F., Howrah.