THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, AMRITSAR

Consumer Complaint No. 239 of 2015

Date of Institution : 16.4.2015

Date of Decision : 09.09.2015

Sarvan Kumar S/o Sh. Kans Raj R/o Laxmi Vihar, Mustafabad, Batala Road, Amritsar

...Complainant

Vs.

PSPC Ltd, through SDO East Sub Division, Amritsar

....Opp.party

Complaint under section 12/13 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986

Present : For the complainant : In person

For the opposite party : Sh. Anil Sharma,Advocate

Quorum : Sh. Bhupinder Singh, President ,Ms. Kulwant Bajwa,Member &

Sh.Anoop Sharma,Member

Order dictated by :-

Bhupinder Singh, President

1 Present complaint has been filed by Sarvan Kumar under the provisions of theConsumer Protection Act alleging therein that he applied for electric connection under DS category by depositing fee of Rs. 1420/-. The complainant visited the office of the opposite party so many times from the date of depositing of fee, but till date no electricity connection has been released at the premises of the complainant. On 9.4.2015 complainant visited the office of the opposite party and requested them to install the connection at the premises of the complainant but they flatly refused to do so. Alleging the same to be deficiency in service complaint was filed seeking directions to the opposite party to install the connection at the premises of the complainant. Compensation of Rs. 10000/- alongwith litigation expenses were also demanded.

2. On notice opposite party appeared and filed written version in which it was submitted that according to the rules and regulations of the PSPCL, where high tension wires were going through, no connection can be issued . It was submitted that over the plot of the complainant high tension wires were passing through, as such no connection can be issued to the complainant and there is no deficiency of service on the part of the opposite party.

3. Complainant tendered his affidavit Ex.C-1, copy of payment receipt Ex.C-2, copy of ration card Ex.C-3, copy of sale deed Ex.C-4.

4. Opposite party tendered affidavit of Sh.Vijay Kumar, AEE ( C ) Ex.OP1, copy of sale regulations Ex.OP2.

5. We have carefully gone through the pleadings of the parties, arguments advanced by the complainant and ld.counsel for the opposite party and have appreciated the evidence produced on record by both the parties with the valuable assistance of the complainant and ld.counsel for the opposite party.

6. From the record i.e. pleadings of the parties and the evidence produced on record by both the parties , it is clear that complainant applied for electric connection under DS category to the opposite party by depositing fee of Rs. 1420/- vide receipt Ex.C-2. But the opposite party did not release/sanction the electric connection to the complainant despite the fact that the complainant visited the office of the opposite party so many times. The complainant submitted that all this amounts to deficiency of service on the part of the opposite party qua the complainant.

7. Whereas the case of the opposite party is that high tension wires are going through/over the plot of the complainant where he has raised construction. According to rules and regulations of the opposite party , no connection can be issued to the plot over which high tension wires are going through. So no connection can be issued to the complainant in the present case. Ld.counsel for the opposite party submitted that there is no deficiency of service on the part of the opposite party qua the complainant.

8. From the entire above discussion, we have come to the conclusion that thecomplainant purchased this plot from Surinder Kumar vide sale deed Ex.C-4 on which he has raised construction and he applied for electric connection to the opposite party at his house by depositing requisite fee of Rs. 1420/- vide receipt Ex.C-2. Resultantly opposite party sent JE to check and report . The said official of the opposite party visited the spot and submitted report dated 28.1.2014 vide which he reported that 11 KV electric wires are passing over the plot/house in question of the complainant. Resultantly the opposite party issued letter memo No. 639 dated 12.6.2014 to the complainant that 11 KV high tension wires are passing over the plot in question of the complainant, as such as per rules and regulations of the opposite party Ex.OP2, no connection can be issued to that plot/house over which high tension electric wires are passing through. As such we are of the opinion that the opposite party was justified in not issuing the electric connection to the complainant at the plot in question over which 11 KV high tension electric wires are passing through. As such there is no deficiency of service on the part of the opposite party qua the complainant.

9. However, after the arguments have already been heard, the complainant submitted written arguments in which he submitted that a few months back, high tension wires have been removed by the opposite party and he placed a copy of the cutting of newspaper. But no name of the newspaper has been mentioned . In that eventuality , if the high tension hot line electric wires passing over the house of the complainant, have been removed by the opposite party, the complainant is at liberty to approach the opposite party afresh.

10. Resultantly we do not find any merit in this complaint and the same is hereby dismissed with no order as to costs. Copies of the order be furnished to the parties free of costs. File is ordered to be consigned to the record room. Complaint could not be disposed of within the stipulated period due to heavy pendency of the cases

in this Forum.

9.9.2015                         (Bhupinder Singh)

                                                  President

                                (Anoop Sharma) (Kulwant Kaur Bajwa)

/R/                                     Member               Member