Haryana

Sonipat

141/2014

BHANMATI W/O MAHENDER SINGH - Complainant(s)

Versus

HUDA - Opp.Party(s)

PAWAN KUMAR

04 Nov 2015

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,

SONEPAT.

             

 

                             Complaint No.141 of 2014

                             Instituted on:22.5.2014

                             Date of order:17.11.2015

 

Smt. Bhanmati wife of Mahender Singh son of Jug Lal, resident of H.No.31/30, Green Belt, Sector 23, Sonepat.

                                            ...Complainant.

 

                      Versus

 

1.HUDA through its Administrator/Estate Officer, HUDA At Sonepat.

2.Executive Engineer, Water and Sewerage HUDA Division, Sonepat.

                                                                                                           ...Respondents.

 

COMPLAINT UNDER SECTION 12 OF        

THE CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT,1986

 

Argued by:Sh. Rajiv Saini Adv. for complainant.

          Sh. Ashok Bhardwaj, Adv. for respondent no.1.

          Sh. Jaideep Kaushik Adv. for respondent no.2.                  

 

 

BEFORE    NAGENDER SINGH, PRESIDENT.

          PRABHA WATI, MEMBER.

          D.V. RATHI, MEMBER.

 

O R D E R

 

          Complainant has filed the present complaint against the respondent alleging herself to be the owner of the house constructed over the plot no.31/30 situated at Green Belt, Sector 23, Sonepat.  The respondents wanted to construct a road for development of Sector 23, Sonepat and the house of the complainant came on the proposed road of HUDA and for that purpose, the respondents were in need of about 02 marla land/ house of the complainant and then the respondents offered to exchange 2 marla land with the plot which was allotted vide plot no.31/30 falls in green belt and the said offer was accepted by the complainant.  The respondents with the permission of LAC Officer HUDA Rohtak and Faridabad allotted the plot no.31/30 and the complainant deposited the development charges of Rs.21780/- on 23.6.2011  as external charges vide serial no.3501 in Estate office at HUDA Sonepat.  The complainant has constructed three storey house and applied for sewerage/water connection, but the same has not been provided to the complainant.  Further as per the site plan of the plot no.31/30, there is road in eastern side and southern side, but some unauthorized occupants have encroached upon southern side road of the house of the complainant and the complainant could not utilize the said road and window etc. The respondents have also not removed the encroachment on the southern side of the house of the complainant and that amounts to a grave deficiency in service on the part of the respondent. So, she has come to this Forum and has filed the present complaint.

2.        In reply, the respondent no.1 has submitted that it is the work of Executive Engineer, Water & Sewerage, HUDA Division, Sonepat to provide sewerage/water connection to the house of the complainant and it is not the work of the respondent.  Certain persons who have encroached upon some land of HUDA had filed a petition before the Hon’ble High Court claiming their ownership over such land, which has been dismissed and now the respondent is taking necessary action against such persons for getting released the encroached land from them and as soon as such land is got released, the land of the road will be made free for use of the complainant. The complainant is not entitled for any relief and thus, prayed for the dismissal of the present complaint.

          The respondent no.2 in its written statement has submitted that the water connection is permitted/sanctioned by the SDE of the respondent no.2 after the approval of the building plan of the plot by the respondent on.1 and sewerage connection is permitted/sanctioned after the issuance of occupation certificate by the respondent no.1.   NO approval of building plan/Occupation certificate has been granted by the respondent no.1 and nor submitted by the complainant.

3.        We have heard the arguments advanced by the ld. Counsel for both the parties at length and we have also gone through the entire relevant material available on the case file carefully & minutely.

4.        The complainant by way of present complaint has sought the relief to direct the respondent to issue her water/sewerage connection  and also to get remove the encroachment from the southern side road of the house of the complainant.

          Ld. Counsel for the respondent no.1 has submitted that it is the work of Executive Engineer, Water & Sewerage, HUDA Division, Sonepat is to provide sewerage/water connection to the house of the complainant and it is not the work of the respondent no.1.  Certain persons who have encroached upon some land of HUDA, had filed a petition before the Hon’ble High Court claiming their ownership over such land, which has been dismissed and now the respondent is taking necessary action against such persons for getting released the encroached land from them and as soon as such land is got released, the land of the road will be made free for use of the complainant.  There is no deficiency in service on the part of the respondent no.1.

          Ld. counsel for the respondent no.2 has submitted that the water connection is permitted/sanctioned by the SDE of the respondent no.2 after the approval of the building plan of the plot by the respondent on.1 and sewerage connection is permitted/sanctioned after the issuance of occupation certificate by the respondent no.1.   NO approval of building plan/Occupation certificate has been granted by the respondent no.1 and nor submitted by the complainant.

               

Counsel for the respondents. As per document Ex.C1, the complainant

has already deposited Rs.21780/- with the respondent no.1 on

23.6.2011.  In our view, if for the redressal of grievances of the

Complainant, any document were required by the respondents, then it

was their duty to inform the complainant in writing.  But it is very

sorry state of affairs that the respondents have not written any

letter to the complainant demanding any such document from the

complainant.  If the respondents would have written any letter to

the complainant, then the complainant must have submit the same with

the respondents.  In our view, water connection and sewerage

connection are the basic amenities and also essential to be provided

by the respondents to the complainant.  Thus, we hereby direct the

respondent no.2 to provide the water connection and sewerage

connection to the complainant within a period of one month from the

date of passing of this order, failing which the law will take its

own recourse.  Further the respondent no.1 is also directed to remove

the encroachment towards southern side road of the house of the

complainant since from the reply filed by the respondent no.1, it

is proved that the Hon’ble High Court, Chandigarh has dismissed the

petition which was filed by certain persons who have encroached upon

some land of HUDA.

          With these observations, findings and directions, the

present complaint stands allowed qua respondent no.1 & 2.                 Certified copy of this order be provided to both the

parties free of cost.

File be consigned to the record-room.

 

 

(Prabha Wati)        (DV Rathi)                 (Nagender Singh-President)

Member DCDRF        Member DCDRF                   DCDRF, Sonepat.

 

Announced: 17.11.2015