Before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Rohtak.

                                                                   Complaint No. : 381

                                                                   Instituted on     : 07.08.2019

                                                                   Decided on       : 03.04.2024

Jai Bhagwans/o Ramehar R/o VPO Makrauli Kalan District Rohtak.

                                                                   ……….………….Complainant.

                                      Vs.

1. Mehar Gas Services, Bharat Gas Distributor, Gohana Road, Rohtak through its Manager.
2. Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd. Dhansu Road, Hissar through its Manager

                                                          ...........……Respondents/opposite parties.

          COMPLAINT U/S 12 OF CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT.

BEFORE:  SH.NAGENDER SINGH KADIAN, PRESIDENT.

                   DR. TRIPTI PANNU, MEMBER.

                   DR. VIJENDER SINGH, MEMBER

Present:       Complainant in person

                   Sh. IshantKhanagwal,Advocate for the opposite party No.1.

                   Opposite party No.2exparte..

                                      ORDER

NAGENDER SINGH KADIAN, PRESIDENT:

1.                Brief facts of the case as per the complainant are that  heis consumer of Bharat Gas vide customer ID No. 15031 through respondent No. 1. The Govt. of India gave instruction to all the Gas Distributers to provide subsidy to their customers and after that the complainant was getting subsidy regularly since 21.07.2015 in his account No. 108810033693 of Dena Bank, Ladhot Branch Distt. Rohtak Haryana. The  KYC has already been completed by the complainant as per direction of the Distributer/respondent No. 1. But after 21.07.2015 the subsidy has not been deposited in Bank account of the complainant  whereas the complainant is paying price of Gas cylinder as per demand of the respondent No. 1. In this regard the complainant filed a complaint before CM Window Rohtak bearing No. CMOFF/N/2019/040225 dated 15.04.2019 but no action was taken by respondents. The complainant visited many a times to office of respondents but all in vain. The complainant sent a legal notice dated 08.07.2019 to the respondents but the respondents intentionally did not reply the legal notice. The act of opposite  parties is illegal and amounts to deficiency in service. Hence this complaint and it is prayed that opposite parties may kindly be directed to make the payment of LPG subsidy from 21.07.2015 to till date and to pay a sum of Rs.50,000/- on account of unnecessary harassment and mental agony and Rs.11,000/- for litigation expenses to the complainant.

2.                After registration of complaint notices were issued to the opposite parties. Opposite party no.1in their reply has submitted thatit is correct to the extent that the complainant is the consumer of opposite partyvide customer ID 15031. It is wrong that the government of India gave any instruction to gas distributers to provide subsidy to their customers. Else it is a matter of record. It is pertaining to mention here that the opposite party is supplying gas on commission basis and the respondent has nothing to do with subsidy procedure. It is further submitted that  the NPCI (national payment corporation of India) is the agency who provides subsidy to customers. Theopposite partyhas nothing to do with the alleged story of complainant. It is correct the complainant moved an application on CM window but it is wrong that no action was taken by the opposite party. It is pertaining to mention here that after moving application complainant approached the opposite party and theyadvised the complainant to visit the bank and linked his aadhar in his bank account. The opposite party told the complainant about the procedure of subsidy. It was further told that  NPCI is the agency who submits subsidy amount in the bank account of customer and the customer has to link his bank account to the Aadhar and the opposite party(gas agency) has nothing to do in it. After looking up all the details of the complainant the opposite party found that the account number given by the complainant to opposite party is closed and the opposite partyadvised the complainant to visit his bank bearing account no. 108810033693. Legal notice was duly replied by the opposite party. All the other contents of the complaint were stated to be wrong and denied and opposite party prayed for dismissal of complaint with costs.

3.                Opposite party No.2 in its reply has submitted that till 21.05.2015 the subsidy was transferred to the customer account in Dena bank, based on BCTC(Bank Cash Transfer Complied). On 21.05.2015 the customer status got changed from BCTC to ACTC(Aadhar Cash Transfer Complied) under DBTL scheme of Govt. of India. It is evident from the reports that customer’s AadharNo. was linked another Bank i.e. the Rohtak Central Co-op Bank and the same was closed by the customer hence subsidy was not being transferred in customer bank account. As soon as, the customer brought this into our notice, the customer was changed from ACTC to BCTC. After guiding the customer, to get his Aadhar linked with another account, but he was unable to do so.  Now all pending subsidies have been transferred by NPCI to customer account. It is further submitted that only NPCI transfer the subsidy amount under DBTL scheme directly to the customer bank account based on BCTC/ACTC and BPCL is the medium to help the customer to get complied for ACTC/BCTC.  However, none appeared on behalf of opposite party no.2 on 08.03.2022 and as such opposite party No.2 was proceeded against exparte vide order dated 08.03.2022 of this Commission.

4.                Ld. counsel for complainant in his evidence has tendered affidavit Ex.CW1/A, CW1/B, documents Ex.C1 to Ex.C6 and closed his evidence on dated 19.03.2021. Ld. Counsel for opposite party No.1 made a statement that reply already filed on behalf of opposite party no.1 be read in evidence and closed his evidence on 08.03.2022.

5.                We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through material aspects of the case very carefully.

6.                Perusal of documents shows that initially the bank account of the complainant was BCTC(Bank Cash Transfer Complied). Thereafter as per the instructions of Govt., all the LPG connections were connected with Aadhar Card. In the present case the Aadhar Card of the complainant was attached with the Central Cooperative bank so one subsidy has been successfully credited in the account of complainant on 09.02.2016 as Rs.241.17/-. Thereafter the account of complainant with RohtakCentral Cooperative  Bank  Ltd. has been closed and the subsidy has not been transferred by the NPCI (National Payment Corporation of India) in the account of complainant. After that when the complainant approached to the CM Window or as well as to the respondent no.1 he was suggested that he should attach his Dena bank account having number 108810033693  with his Aadhar Card in the given time. As per the written statement filed by respondent no.2 complainant’s customer status was changed from AadharCard  ACTC to BCTC(Bank cash Transfer Complied). Thereafter the Aadhar card of the complainant had been attached with the bank account of the complainant with Dena Bank, the NPCI(National Payment corporation of India) transferred the pending subsidy of the complainant from 23.05.2017 to 29.10.2019 in the account of complainant with Dena Bank on 13.11.2019. One more pending subsidy dated 12.07.2019 was also transferred in the account of complainant on 14.11.2019. Thereafter the complainant was regularly receiving the subsidy as per the documents placed on record by the respondent no.2 alongwith his written statement. We have also perused the account statement placed on record by the complainant Ex.C5 for the period 2015 to 2019 but the same is not visible. However at the time of arguments, complainant has placed on record a statement of account ‘Annexure-JNA’.We have compared the account statement Annexure JN-A with the account statement annexed with the written statement of opposite party no.2.  Perusal of this statement shows  that some transactions were failed due to the reason : “Account closed or transferred” which are as under:-

The alleged pending subsidy amount of Rs.1284.46/- hasnot been credited in the account of complainant.As per the written statement filed by the opposite party no.1, they have no concern with the subsidy procedure. The subsidy has been covered by the NPCI. On the other hand, it is observed that all the data was available with the opposite party no.2 but despite that the alleged  amounthas not been credited in the account of complainant despite repeated requests of the complainant. Hence there is deficiency in service on the part of opposite party no.2 and the opposite party No.2 is liable to refund the alleged amount alongwith compensation to the complainant.

7.                In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, we hereby allow the complaint and direct the opposite party no.2 to refund the amount of Rs.1284.46/-(Rupees one thousand two hundred eighty four and forty six paise only) alongwith interest @ 9% p.a from the date of filing the present complaint i.e. 07.08.2019 till its realization and also to pay Rs.5000/-(Rupees five thousand only) as compensation on account of deficiency in service and Rs.5000/-(Rupees five thousand only) as litigation expenses to the complainant within one month from the date of decision.  

7.                Copy of this order be supplied to both the parties free of costs. File be consigned to the record room after due compliance.

Announced in open court:

03.04.2024.

                                                          ........................................................

                                                          Nagender Singh Kadian, President

                                                          ..........................................

                                                          TriptiPannu, Member.

                                                          ……………………………….

                                                          Vijender Singh, Member