Orissa

Rayagada

CC/135/2015

Sri Darshan Varma - Complainant(s)

Versus

Mobil World - Opp.Party(s)

Self

07 Oct 2015

ORDER

                 DISTRICT   CONSUMER  DISPUTES REDRESSAL    FORUM, RAYAGADA

                                                 C.C. Case  No.135/ 2013.

                                                         

 P R E S E N T .

Sri Pradeep Kumar Dash, LL.B,                             President.

Sri Gadadhara Sahu,B.Sc.                         Member

            Sri Suresh Chandra Dash,S/o Sri Binayak Dash,At: Karan Street,Po/Dist.      Rayagada,       Odisha.                        Versus                                                             …….Complainant.

1. The P.I.O, Rural Works Department, Rayagada.
2. The  Executive Engineer, Rural Works Department, Rayagada.                                                                                                                                                              …..Opp.Parties

Counsel for the parties:

For the complainant: In Person

For the O.Ps: Self

                                                                JUDGMENT

                        The facts of the complaint  in brief is that  the complainant has applied for supply of information under the R.T.I Act,2005 on 30.10.2013   along with the prescribed fees  in the office of the O.p. No.1 for which  the O.p. No.1 has issued an acknowledgement  of receipt of the application.  Thereafter  the complainant contacted several times  but the O.ps advised to await for some time to get the information and when the complainant did not get any information he approached this forum and prayed to direct the O.ps to  give information as  applied by him and award suitable compensation for harassment . Hence this complaint.

                         On being noticed, the O.p 1  appeared nor filed  written version and the O.p 2 neither appeared nor filed written version as such the O.p 2 was   set exparte. It is submitted by the O.p No.1  that the information sought for by the complainant is lengthy and not readily available with the O.P 1, However soon after receipt of his application the PIO promptly intimated the complainant on 31.10.2012 vide letter No.54 dt.31.10.12 that the information will be supplied to him after receipt from the Division office.  It proves that the O.P 1 has never neglected to supply the information or harassed the complainant in any manner. It is further submitted that the complainant has requested to supply the information in odiya language. Since most of the information are technical information and available in English language it require lot to time  and man power for interpretation of the same. Hence, the complainant was requested to deposit an amount of Rs.5,000/- towards engagement of special man power  for preparation into odiya and making photo copy of the documents. The PIO never  denied to supply the information or tried to harass the complainant. Finally, the required information  was supplied  to the complainant vide letter No.1788 dt.08.07.2013  .The delay was occurred only for obtaining the information from different sections of Division office through official procedure. In  view of the facts, it is prayed to  kindly consider the facts and circumstances of delay and coercive action may not be taken against the O.p1.

                         The complainant urged that the consumer protection act is benevolent legislation and is  an additional remedy available to the consumer as per the Section 3 of the C.P.Act. To substantiate his argument the complainant has relied on the decision of our Hon’ble National Commission, New Delhi in the case of Dr.S.P.Triumaula Rao, Mysore Vrs. Municipal Commissioner, Mysore, City Municipal Corporation, Mysore in R.P.No.1975 of 2005 dt.28.05.2009.

             Again at para-10  Hon’ble Supreme Court  further  held that:-

                        “ Harassment of a common man by public authority is socially abhorring and legally impermissible. It  may harm him personally but the injury to society is for more grievous crime and corruption thrive and damaging than  the feeling of helplessness. An ordinary citizen instead of complaining and fighting succumbs to the pressure of undesirable functioning in offices in stead of standing against it therefore the aware  of compensation for harassment by public authorities not openly compensates.  The individual, satisfies him personally but helps in curing social  evil. It may result to improving the work culture and help in changing the outlook”.

            As we have already held  in the foregoing points that the complaint is maintainable, and it is not barred by limitation and the O.s have committed deficiency in service to the complainant, in our opinion the complainant is entitled to get relief. Hence we are inclined to pass the following order.

On the strength of the aforesaid rulings of the highest judicial bodies of the country this forum allows this case. Hence, to meet the ends of justice, the following order is passed.

                                                  ORDER

The O.p. No.1 is directed to furnish the required information sought by the complainant in his application on free of cost under intimation this forum  and pay Rs.2,000/- towards cost and compensation for mental agony  of the complainant.

                        Pronounced in open forum today on this  19^th day of September,2016 under the seal and signature of this forum.

                         A copy of this order as per the statutory requirements , be forwarded to the parties    free of charge.

 

Member                                                                                               President

Documents relied upon:

By the complainant:

1. copy  application form
2. Copy of receipt book
3. Copy of letter No.66 dt.31.01.2013
4. Copy of Form D
5. Copy of letter No.82 dt.2.4.13
6. Copy of postal acknowledgement
7. Consignment note of Dolphin  Service

 

By the Opp.Party: Nil                                                              President