DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, MANSA. Complaint No.159/17.09.2007 Decided on : 15.04.2008 Gurbachan Singh S/o Sh. Jang Singh S/o Sh.Nihal Singh, resident of village Bhaini Bagah, Tehsil and District Mansa. ..... Complainant. VERSUS 1. Sub Divisional Officer, Punjab State Electricity Board, Rural, Mansa. 2. Executive Engineer, Punjab State Electricity Board, Mansa. 3. Chairman, Punjab State Electricity Board, Patiala. ..... Opposite Parties. Complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. ..... Present: Sh. Lalit Kumar Arora, counsel for the complainant. Sh.G.K.Mangla, counsel for the opposite parties. Before: Sh.S.M.S.Mahil, President. Sh.Sarat Chander, Member. ORDER: Gurbachan Singh (hereinafter called as the complainant) has filed the present complaint against the Punjab State Electricity Board, through its Sub Divisional Officer and Executive Engineer at Mansa, as well as its Chairman at Patiala (hereinafter called as opposite Parties No.1,2 & 3, respectively) for issuance of a direction to the opposite parties to release his tube well connection immediately and also pay him Contd.......2 : 2 : Rs.50,000/- by way of compensation regarding mental harassment. Admitted facts of the complaint are that the complainant had applied for release of electric tube well connection and deposited the security amount of Rs.160/- on 08.11..1990 vide receipt No.356 with the opposite parties. Thereafter, in compliance of the demand notice issued by the opposite parties, the complainant had deposited an amount of Rs.15,840/- on 09.05.2005 vide receipt No.323. However, despite the completion of the formalities and preparing of a priority list by the OP Board, the opposite parties had failed to release the electric tube well connection to him. The complainant alleges to have suffered mental harassment. Hence this complaint. In the written version filed by the opposite parties it was contended that the application filed by the complainant was under HT category and his seniority in the seniority list of the applicants stood at No.30. It was further contended that the tube well connection to the complainant will be released in accordance with the seniority and availability of the requisite material and necessary equipment without disturbing the seniority list prepared by the Board for issuing the tube well connections. A prayer for dismissal of the complaint was accordingly made. Both the parties have led their respective evidence in the shape of affidavits and documents. We have considered the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and carefully gone through the record of the case. From the facts of this complaint, it is evident that the opposite parties have not disputed the right of the complainant about the release of electric connection. However, the only difficulty is regarding the seniority Contd........3 : 3 : of the complainant which was stated to be fixed at Sr.No.30 as per the seniority list prepared by the opposite parties, copy of which is Exhibit OP- 1 placed on record by the opposite parties. In such circumstances, it cannot be held that the opposite parties were, in any way, deficient in service towards the complainant. Commercial Circular No.21/2006 indicates that as per revised Service Regulation-24 of P.S.E.B. Circulated vide CC No.57/01 dated 11.07.2001, it was observed that, once the prospective consumer complies with the Demand Notice, the efforts shall be made by Field Officers for release of connection as early as possible and that also subject to availability of funds, material, power position, loading conditions of system etc. We are of the considered opinion that if the authorities are of the view that they were not in a position to release the electric tube well connections to Prospective Consumers at an early date, they should not issue Demand Notice to the consumers for depositing of huge amounts. In the present case, the complainant had deposited an amount of Rs.15,840/- on .09.05.2005 in compliance of the demand notice and despite the expiry of about 3 years it is not certain as to when the connection would be released to him. Obviously, the OP Board is depriving the prospective consumers of the use of the said amount and is enriching itself at their costs. In such circumstances, the opposite parties are liable to compensate the complainant either by payment of interest on the aforesaid amount or by refunding the same with interest and get this amount re-deposited when the turn of the complainant for release of electric connection to him comes. As a consequence of the foregoing reasons, since the opposite parties cannot be compelled to release the electric tube well connection to Contd........4 : 4 : the complainant immediately as it is likely to cause prejudice to the right of other prospective consumers, the complaint is dismissed with the observation that the electric connection shall be released to the complainant as per his seniority fixed in accordance with the Rules of the Board. The opposite parties, however, shall be liable to pay interest to the complainant on the amount of Rs.15,840/- @ 8% per annum from the date of deposit till the release of electric connection to him or refund the amount with interest at the aforesaid rate from the date of deposit and get the amount re-deposited after serving a prior notice upon him before the release of electric connection to him. Parties shall bear their own costs Copy of the order be supplied to the parties free of charges under the rules and file be consigned to record. Pronounced: 15.04.2008 Sarat Chander, S.M.S.Mahil, Member. President.
