DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, BHIWANI.

                                                                           CONSUMER COMPLAINT NO.09 OF 2014.

                                                            DATE OF INSTITUTION: 02.01.2014.

                                                            DATE OF ORDER: .06.06.2016

Dalbir Singh son of Sh. Dharam Chand, resident of village Chhpar, Tehsil Charkhi Dadri, District Bhiwani.

                                                                                ………Complainant.

                    Versus

1. D.H.B.V.N.L. Ltd, Vidyut Nagar, Hisar, through its Managing Director.
2. The Executive Engineer, S/U Sub/Divn., DHBVN, Bhiwani.
3. The Sub Divisional Officer, ‘OP’ Sub Division DHBVN Atela Kalan, District Bhiwani.

………Opposite Parties.

          COMPLAINT U/S 12 & 13 OF THE CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT,

BEFORE:         Shri Rajesh Jindal, President,

                        Smt. Ansuya Bishnoi, Member,

Present:           Shri Sikander, Advocate for complainant.

                        Shri R.S. Sharma, Advocate for Opposite Parties.

ORDER:-

RAJESH JINDAL, President:

                    In brief, the case of the complainant is that he had applied for releasing the power connection to the tubewell under A.P. category and requisite amount in shape of security deposit was made vide receipt No. 145 book No. 108 dated 20.12.2006 under which scheme all the expenses whatsoever in the installation of the Transformer, L.T. Line, Poles, Conducting Wires were to be borne by the Ops.  It is alleged that after the release of the seniority list of the applicants for the release of A.P. Connection the complainant were contacted for a number of time but OP no. 3 assured the complainant that a requisite action would be taken and within one month the A.P. Connection would be released in his favour over his tubewell.  It is alleged that the OP no. 3 intimated the complainant that the record of the consumers and the applicants was caught by fire and at present no record is available with them.  It is alleged that he made many sincere efforts to get the connection released but nothing concrete was done by the Ops.  The complainant further alleged that due to the act and conduct of the Ops he has to suffer mental agony and harassment.  Hence, it amounts to deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties and as such he had to file the present complaint for release the power connection alongwith compensation.

2.                 Opposite parties on appearance filed written statement alleging therein that he applied for tubewell connection in the year 2006 as per his own version and filing the present petition in the year of 2014.  It is submitted that the applicant deposited only security, however respondent have no reocrd in this regard, because record of the Sub Division was burnt in a fire but the applicant did not deposited duplicate file with the Ops nor he produced any receipt regarding his requisite fees, hence his application cancelled.  It is submitted that if applicant deposited any fees then he produced strict proof of the same, because Ops have no record in this regard.  Hence, in view of the circumstances mentioned above, there is no deficiency in service on the part of Ops and the complaint of the complainant is liable to be dismissed against respondents with costs.

3.                In order to make out his case, the counsel for complainant has tendered into evidence affidavit Mark A and documents Annexure C-1 to Annexure C-3 along with supporting affidavit.

4.                In reply thereto, the counsel for Ops has tendered into evidence document Annexure R-1 alongwith supporting affidavit.

5.                 We have gone through the record of the case carefully and have heard the learned counsels for the parties.

6.                   Learned Counsel for the complainant reiterated the contents of the complaint.  He submitted that the complainant applied for the electricity connection for his tubewell under AP category and deposited Rs. 20,000/- with the Ops on 20.12.2006.  He submitted that the complainant is ready to complete necessary formalities on his part which were applicable at the relevant time.  He submitted that the Ops have harass the complainant to complete the necessary formalities as of present circular.

7.                 Learned Counsel for the Ops reiterated the contents of the reply.   He submitted that all the record including record of complainant was burnt and FIR in this regard was registered with the concerned police station, the photo copy of which is Annexure R-1.  He produced the sale circular No. D-80/2001.

8.                 Considering the pleadings and arguments of the parties, we direct the Ops to release electricity connection for the tubewell of the complainant under A.P. category as per the rules applicable at the relevant time when the complainant applied for the AP connection and the complainant is directed to complete all the necessary formalities and provide the duplicate file to the Ops for AP connection.  This order be complied with by the Ops with 60 days, after the receipt of the duplicate file from the complainant. Certified copies of the order be sent to the parties free of costs.  File be consigned to the record room, after due compliance.

Announced in open Forum.

Dated: 06.06.2016.                                                                         (Rajesh Jindal)

                                                                                                President,      

                                                                                    District Consumer Disputes

                                                                                    Redressal Forum, Bhiwani.

                 (Ansuya Bishnoi)              

                        Member.