ORDER                                 Dated:  16-01-2017

Mohd. Anwar Alam, President

1. Hon’ble State Commission vide order 24.08.2012 passed in FA no. 404/2012 this case was remanded back to the District Forum  for further proceedings according to law.  Hon’ble State Commission vide order dated 21.10.2016 passed in FA no. 41/2016 has set-aside the order dated 12.08.2015 passed by this forum.   Hence matter was reconsidered.
2. Complainant has filed this complaint on 18-01-2012 and alleged that  complainant is  a society and runs R.K. Films and Media Academy which is a purely educational activity i.e. the teaching & training in media study and  since the complainant society is a tenant hence it did not avail any facility  in its own name and  a water supply meter bearing K.NO.1062853095 was installed in the building which is in  the name of Sh. Ajay Kumar (ex-director of the landlord company)  and all the bills/charges are being paid by the complainant society through its unit R.K. Films & Media Academy to the OP and being the tenant/user of the water facility and since the society is running an academy hence it has been considered as a commercial activity by the OP and OP has been charging commercial rate of water supply. Complainant further stated that the water supplied by OP is used  only for the drinking purpose by the students and complainant society is a non-profit body and not a commercial body and the company has been requesting OP to charge on the non-commercial scale. Complainant sent a letter dated 16.08.2011 to OP along with a newspaper cutting showing that the connection is a domestic one and not the commercial one and hence the water usages should be charged as per domestic rates and society had made excessive payments to OP which are liable to be refunded by OP. Hence complainant prayed to pass an order to change the connection from commercial to domestic and to refund / adjust the excessive payment already made by the complainant in the coming bills and direct the OP to pay a sum of Rs. 33,000/- /- as cost of litigation.
3. In reply, OP alleged that the complaint is not maintainable as the water connection is for commercial category (CII) and complainant has failed to comply with the provision of section 96 of the Delhi Jal Board Act, 1998 .  OP  further alleged that even for the school/ educational institute the water bill is raised under C-II. OP denied  that complainant sent any request on 16/08/2011 for changing the category of water connection. OP denied rest of the allegations made in the complaint and prayed that complaint be dismissed.  
4. The complainant has filed rejoinder to the written statement and denied the objections made by the OP and supported his complaint.
5. In support of  his complaint complainant filed his own affidavit along with documents i.e. copy of rent agreement  (Ex. CW-1/A) , photograph  showing usage of water (Ex. CW-1/B)  , news  paper cutting (Ex. CW-1/C),  certified true copy of resolution (Ex. CW-1/D) , water bill dated 14/10/2011 (Ex. CW-1/E), water bill dated 30/06/2011 (Ex. CW-1/F).
6.  In support of reply OP filed affidavit of Ms. Neelam Chopra, ZRO  along with documents i.e. copy of DJB tariff categorization order (Ex. DW1/A)
7. OP has filed its written arguments.
8. We have heard the arguments and considered the evidence led by the parties and their  oral arguments.  In this case points to be considered are as under:

 (a) Whether complainant is a consumer?

 (b) Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of the OP?

 (c) Relief?

9. The substance of the complaint that complainant is using the water connection in the name of Sh. Ajay Kumar ,8A/8, W.E.A Karol Bagh ,G.  F., New Delhi (Ex. CW1/F) which is under the category C-II i.e. commercial category.  Infact application dated 16.08.2011 was written by Mr. Ajay Kumar to the OP for request to charge only domestic rates and to refund extra charges therefore in our considered opinion Sh. Ajay Kumar is the person who has requested OP to convert his commercial connection into the domestic connection and he is not a complainant in this matter and in his absence this complaint is not maintainable against the OP. It is pertinent to mention herein that complainant is using the water connection of Sh. Ajay Kumar as a tenant  and a tenant can apply for water connection with No Objection Certificate from the landlord.  In these circumstances it is not true that in this case complainant sent written request on 16.08.2011 as alleged in para no. 11 of the complaint.
10.  Looking to the above facts and circumstances refund of difference of commercial to domestic charges can be claimed by the above said Ajay Kumar and not by the complainant. Infact, OP has been raising the bill as per rules in the name of Sh. Ajay Kumar as itself evident from Ex. CW1/E hence complainant cannot challenge the bill raised by the OP in the name of Sh. Ajay Kumar without impleading Sh. Ajay Kumar in this case hence this complaint is not maintainable and dismissed accordingly.
11.  Both the parties will bear their own cost.
12. Copy of the order made available to the parties free of cost as per law. File  be consigned to record room.

Announced on………