Complainant/petitioner, a retired officer of the Indian Air Force, made a Farmhouse at his native village for cultivation purposes. He got the electricity installed in his Farmhouse and, upon advice of the JE Electricity, executed an agreement for two tube-wells. The contractor, after laying cables for first tube-well, took away all the equipment for second tube-well. Complainant made several applications for connection to the second tube-well but the connection was not given. So much so, the connection for the first tube-well was also disconnected in September 2000. Upon enquiry, the complainant found that the second tube-well, - 2 - though not running practically, was functioning on the papers of the electricity department, against which the billing continued from 20.9.1996. Demand was created on the petitioner, which was not paid. Connection for the first tube-well was also disconnected. Petitioner filed a representation. The Executive Engineer inspected the spot, got the first tube-well reconnected and ordered an enquiry. On the basis of the enquiry report, the overdue amount from ledger against the name of the complainant was cancelled and the complainant was informed vide letter dated 17.12.2001 that charges of Rs.35,558/- levied on him were withdrawn. In spite of letter dated 17.12.2001, the respondent kept on showing Rs.35,558/- as balance towards the second tube-well connection. Petitioner, being aggrieved, filed the complaint seeking cancellation of the bill mount of Rs.35,558/-. In addition, he sought refund of the security amount as also compensation of Rs.50,000/- towards mental agony. District Forum quashed the demand of Rs.35,558/-. Respondents were directed to refund the entire security amount within one month in respect of the second tube-well. Rs.25,000/- were awarded by way of compensation. Petitioner, being satisfied with the order of the District Forum, did not file any appeal before the State Commission. - 3 - Opp.parties filed the appeal before the State Commission, which has been dismissed by the impugned order. Petitioner had accepted the order of the District Forum and did not file the appeal and has now filed the revision petition seeking a compensation of Rs.15 lakh. We do not find any substance in this revision petition. Since the petitioner had accepted the order of the District Forum and did not file the appeal before the State Commission seeking enhancement of compensation, he cannot now seek enhancement of compensation by filing the revision petition. The revision petition is totally misconceived. Dismissed. |
