DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, KANDHAMAL, PHULBANI
C.C.NO.02 OF 2016
Present: Sri Rabindranath Mishra - President.
Miss Sudhiralaxmi Pattanaik - Member .
Sri Purna Chandra Tripathy - Member .
Smt. Basanti Mishra, aged about – 51 years.
W/O: Sri Bala Mukunda Mishra At: Masterpada
PO:Phulbani Dist : Kandhamal ……………………….. Complainant .
Versus.
1. Executive Engineer,
Lift Irrigation, Division Phulbani At/PO: Phulbani Dist: Kandhamal
2. Asst. Engineer, Lift Irrigation Sub- Division, Phulbani
At/PO: Phulbani Dist: Kandhamal
3. Junior Engineer, Lift Irrigation (H.Q) section, Phulbani
At/PO: Phulbani Dist: Kandhamal …………………………….. OPP. Parties.
For the Complainant: Sri Nirod Kumar Patra Advocate Phulbani and his Associates.
For the OPP. Parties: Self.
Date of Order: 29-12-2016
O R D E R
The case of the Complainant in brief is that she had deposited a sum of Rs.40, 000/- for digging deep bore well over the plot No. 734/736 of Mouza Dubagarah under the Kandhamal Tahasil in Buju Krushak Vikash Yojana in the year 2012. The purpose is to provide water to her mango orchard. The O.P had selected the site inside the Complainant’s Farm and completed the digging of two bore wells, but the O.P did not install the Pump set immediately.
-2-
After repeated approach the O.P installed two 3 H.P Kilosker vertical submersible Pump set including all accessories and charged electrical connection which was delayed. Out of those two bore wells one bore well is functioning and other one has been collapsed since 02-04-2012 due to technical defect. So the Complainant intimated the O.P several time over phone. On 04-05-2015 a petition was given to the O.Ps by registered post by the husband of the Complainant but no action was taken by the O.P for repair. As a result of which the Complainant was unable to provide sufficient water to her 400 nos of fruit bearing mango trees during summer season for which fruit yielding has been effected since three years which amounts to deficiency in service of the O.ps. The O.ps are not taking any steps for digging another bore well or to repair for supply of water, as a result the Complainant was harassed and put to mental tension and there was financial loss of Rs. 2,00,000/- during last 3 years . Hence, the complaint filed by the Complainant for a direction to the O.Ps to dig a new bore well inside the firm of the Complainant and to grant compensation of Rs. 2,00,000/- for her mental agony and financial loss .
The case of the O.P as per their joint version is that Odisha Lift Irrigation Corporation is a Govt. of Odisha Undertaking and execution of work is guided by Odisha Public Works Department Code. After successful completion of drealing works the electrification of bore well is taken by engaging private agencies as per guide line of OPWD Code. The same is done properly by the O.P. So, the allegation of delay in installation of pump set accessories and charging of electricity and others are not true. The electrical estimates of SOUTHCO was received vide letter No. 114 dated 17-01-2013 as per annexure –A. The electrical work was executed engaging private agencies and the electrical line charged to the bore well on 09-03-2013.The pump set was installed in the bore well only after charging of electricity to the bore well point. So, the allegation of installation of pump set in the bore well in the month of April 2012 is not true. As per guide line of BIju Krushak Vikash yojana –Deep Bore Well Secha Karyakarma scheme the repair and maintenance of bore well shall be borne by the beneficiary. Annexure -D is the said guideline. Hence, the O.P has not shown any negligence and defficiency in service to the beneficiary complainant for which they shall not liable to pay any compensation and to dig a new bore well as prayed by the Complainant .
During course of hearing we have heard the learned counsel appearing for the Complainant and the O.Ps. We have gone through the complaint petition and the joint version filed by the O.Ps. We have also gone through the copies of documents filed by both the parties in support of their case .The main allegation of the Complainant is that out of two bore well one bore well is functioning and the other one has been collapsed since 02-04-2012 due to technical defect. It reveals from the Complaint that the Complainant intimated the O.ps on 05-05-2015 by registered post through her husband after 3 years of the alleged technical defect. Moreover it is seen from the annexure –D, the guide line that “beneficiary will bear all expenses towards repair and maintenance of bore well in future”. So, as far as the repair and maintenance of the bore well is concerned it is the responsibility of the Complainant to repair the bore well in her own cost. The O.ps have specifically mentioned in Para- 9 of their version that the electrical work was executed in engaging private
-3-
agencies and the electrical line was charged to the bore well of the petitioner on 09-02-2013.So, it cannot be believed that the bore well was out of order since 02-04-2012.
As per above discussion we are in view that the Complaint filed by the Complainant has no merit. Hence, the Complaint stands dismissed being devoid of merit.
The C.C is disposed of. Supply free copies of this order to both the parties at an early date.
MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT
