Delhi

East Delhi

CC/768/2015

RANJEET - Complainant(s)

Versus

D.J.B - Opp.Party(s)

01 Oct 2018

ORDER

               DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTE REDRESSAL FORUM, EAST, Govt of NCT Delhi

                CONVENIENT SHOPPING CENTRE, 1^st FLOOR, SAINI ENCLAVE, DELHI 110092                               

                                                                                                   Consumer complaint no.       768/2015

                                                                                                   Date of Institution               01/10/2015

                                                                                                   Order Reserved on              01/10/2018     

                                                                                                   Date of Order                       04/10/2018                                                                                                       

In matter of

Mr Ranjeet mishra, adult  

s/o- Mr Chandra Pal Mishra

HN- 244/47A School Block, Gali no. 5

Mandawali Fasalpur, Delhi 110092………..…..………..…………….Complainant

                                                             

                                                                         Vs

1- Delhi Jal Board,

    Preet Vihar, Delhi 110092

 

2-Delhi Govt.,

    Govt of NCT of Delhi

    Delhi Secretariat, New Delhi 110002………….…………………..Opponents

 

Complainant                                     In Person

Opponent’s Advocate                     Mr Arvind Kumar Singh & Mr Shiv Prasad, ZRO

 

Corum-     Sh Sukhdev Singh         President

                    Dr P N Tiwari                 Member

                    Mrs Harpreet Kaur       Member         

 

Order by Dr P N Tiwari, Member                                                                                 

                   

Brief Facts of the case-                                                                                                

Complainant having water connection no 9898910000 since 2008 and was paying water charges 29/01/2013. It was stated that OP was issuing an average water bills on 6 months cycle basis. It was also stated that complainant was getting severed / black dirty water for the last 7 months. A new water meter was installed on 30/12/2013, but no bill was sent by OP. Govt of Delhi gave benefit scheme of 20,000 Lt/pm free of charges from Jan 2014, but complainant was not given any benefit of Govt scheme and on inquiring from OP office, it was told that his building had no valid water connection, so no rebate on scheme would be provided. Complainant gave representations to all higher officials of OP and even area MLA Sh Manish Sisodia, no action was taken, hence complainant suffered heavy loss. Complainant stated that he was constrained to use dirty water for over seven months. The matter was brought in Hindi news paper “Dainik Jagran” and printed on 9th July, 2014. Thereafter, old pipeline was changed and clean water was supplied. It was stated that RTI applications were filed and received replies from OP 1 office (Ex OPW1/1, 1A, 2, 2A) which stated that there was no valid Govt approved water meter was installed by complainant (Ex CW1/1, 2, 2A,B,C, 3&4). This reply was wrong and complainant asked various queries, but OP1 and 2 did not reply.

Complainant stated that Delhi Govt. launched 20,000 Ltrs. of free water scheme to every citizens of Delhi, but complainant was denied by this scheme due to wrong reply by OP as there was no Govt water connection. It was done intentionally by OP. So complainant suffered heavy loss and harassment by wrong act of OP 1 and 2. OP 1 gave wrong bills dated 03/04/2014, 13/03/2015, 22/06/2015, & 07/04/2015 (Ex CW1/5,6,7 &8). Thereafter, filed this complaint on 01/10/2015 where he appealed  for  waiving off illegally charged water charges Rs 9963/-with  compensation of Rs 80,000/- and putting penalty on corrupt officials  of  OP 1  and 2 by  way  of 60-40 basis than only the rights of consumers at large can be protected and saved.

After notices were served, OP 1 replied on behalf of 2 also and submitted a joint written submission and denied all the allegation put by complainant. It was submitted that OP had always supplied good portable drinking water in the area. This report was also submitted in the court. It was wrong to say that the said consumption bills were incorrect. There were huge dues which complainant had not paid since long and late payment surcharges were also added on as per Delhi Govt water policies (Ex OPW1/1, 1A, 2 and 2A) and were on record. As per OP account’s office, complainant had paid last bill on 29/01/2013, but did not pay balance payment.

As soon as Delhi Govt scheme was introduced for availing free 20,000 lts of water free of cost to to every person of Delhi irrespective of single member family or multiple. The bills were issued on the basis of water consumption per month. As far as late payment surcharges were concerned, Govt extended its benefit to the complainant also and waived off charges of Rs 8,000/-It was denied that OP had ever supplied dirty water to complainant. Complainant had never submitted any evidence or lab. report to establish that dirty water was supplied by OP.

As complainant had to put concrete evidence to prove his case, but here in this case, no such authentic evidence was submitted by complainant. Hence, there was no deficiency in their services or dirty water supply was ever supplied by OP. More so, complainant had never raised any objection in over seven months when dirty water was supplied as alleged by complainant.

It was admitted that when complainant raised his grievances pertaining to leakage of water supply in his colony, immediately required repair was done as per their evidence submitted on record, but it doesn’t pertain to the period from 2013 Dec. to July 2014. It could never be admitted that complainant had taken dirty water from their drinking water pipe line as it could not be proved by any evidence or affidavit. Also except complainant, none from the colony had raised any issue or objection pertaining to dirty water supply.

It was strongly denied that whole colony residents fell ill in seven months and no one raised objection about dirty water supply, whereas only complainant suffered heavy loss when he was getting same water from the pipeline from which other residents were getting water. As complainant had not paid their water bill since long and thus arrears and late payment were added on, but due to the rebate scheme, complainant was given maximum rebate in late payment charges, but it was also waived off as per note from the Govt for Rs 8,000/-. Therefore this complaint may be dismissed.

Complainant filed rejoinder to the written statement and denied all the replies submitted by OP. Complainant stated that his facts were correct as per facts stated in his complaint. He also submitted his own affidavit and reaffirmed that all his evidences were correct. He stressed that OP had waived off 8,000/- but did not waive off Rs 1089/- without specifying reason. So, he prayed to waive off this amount also.

OP also submitted their evidence on affidavit through Mr Shiv Prasad, working as Zonal Revenue officer, (west EI) Preet Vihar, Delhi, stated that their facts and evidence submitted on record were correct. It was submitted that running bills of months May and June, 2016 were due for Rs 1089/ (Ex OPW1/10) which were not paid by the complainant, whereas complainant had raised his issues pertaining to 2015 which were resolved under Govt Scheme. OP submitted evidences as Ex OPW1/11 and 11 A pertaining to Quality Control Laboratory Sample Report which showed water samples were found to be bacteriologically satisfactory and in confirmation of BIS 10500-2012 and found fit for drinking purposes. The lab reports showing physical and chemical examination of sample was also put on record (Ex OPW1/12). All the reports and status of analysis was sent to the complainant and were on record as Ex OPW1/13 and 14.

Arguments were heard from the complainant and OP counsel. File was perused and order was reserved.  

By analyzing the facts of complaint, written statement of OP and evidences of both the parties which are on affidavit, it is clear that OP had not issued any irregular water bills, but complainant had not paid previous dues which were due after deducting about Rs 8000/- under the scheme. During current month bills on record for the months of May, June and Dec. 2016, the actual consumption was less so under the scheme, no charges were put rather previous dues were reflected for the period from 2013 to 2015.

As the first allegation was of supplying dirty water to complainant’s house and in colony, complainant could not prove by any expert lab report that dirty water was supplied to the colony and to complainant’s house by way of Quality Control Lab or any evidence that members of the colony or complainant himself suffered medical problems after drinking /consuming dirty water for over 7 months. Hence, this allegation goes. As far as issuing wrong bill by OP, it was admitted that average bills were issued based on limit of consumption of water. So, no wrong bill was ever issued.

Hence, we come to the conclusion that this complaint has no merit and deserves to be dismissed so dismissed without any order to cost. We also direct OP1 to recover old dues, if any, as per Govt rules, but if OP1 can waive off remaining dues under any scheme, may do so as per Delhi Jal Board rules.  

The copy of this order be sent to the parties as per the Regulations and file be consigned to the Record Room.

 

(Dr) P N Tiwari – Member                                                                 Mrs –Harpreet Kaur- Member                   

 

                                                  Shri Sukhdev Singh – President