DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,
PATIALA.
Consumer Complaint No.245 of 15.6.2016
Decided on: 8.6.2017
Dhani Ram aged about 58 years son of Sh.Kishori Ram resident of village Sadhmajra(Nirmalkot) Tehsil Patran District Patiala.
…………...Complainant
Versus
- Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd., Head Office, The Mall, Patiala through its Secretary.
- Executive Engineer, Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd.,Samana District Patiala.
- The Asstt.Executive Engineer(SDO)PSPCL, Samana District Patiala.
…………Opposite Parties
Complaint under Section 12 of the
Consumer Protection Act, 1986.
QUORUM
Smt. Neena Sandhu, President
Smt. Neelam Gupta, Member
ARGUED BY:
Sh.K.K.Vohra,Advocate,counsel for complainant.
Sh.Pawan Puri,Advocate,counsel for opposite parties.
ORDER
SMT.NEENA SANDHU, PRESIDENT
Sh.Dhani Ram, complainant has filed this complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act,1986 ( hereinafter referred to as the Act) against the Opposite Parties (hereinafter referred to as the O.Ps.) . The brief facts of the complaint are as under:
2. That the complainant being in physical and cultivating possession of the land comprised of Khewat No.1/1 Khatoni No.56, Khasra No.19//11(8-0), 23//15(8-0), 23//16m(9 ) Sadhmarja(Nirmalkot),Tehsil Patran, under the ownership of Akhara Dharam Dhaja Nirmla Sadha, applied for 7.1/2 BHP power connection, vide application No.5262, for irrigation purposes of the above said land and deposited Rs.1500/- on 30.3.2007, as security with the OPs. He also completed all other required formalities for getting the power connection. Thereafter, he contacted the OPs for the release of the power connection but the OPs kept on lingering on the matter on one pretext or the other. Ultimately on 19.2.2014, he received demand notice no.730 but no connection was released. In the month of January,2015, the complainant moved an application for the release of the power connection . In the month of January,2016, the OPs got deposited a sum of Rs.50/-. It is averred that the owner of the land i.e. Akhara Dharam Dhaja, has no objection, if the connection is released in his favor. He also submitted No objections Certificate of the owner of the land, in this regard. The complainant time and again approached and requested the OPs for the release of the connection but the OPs failed to pay any heed to his request. There is deficiency of service on the part of the OPs and he is suffering from mental agony and physical harassment. Hence this complaint with a prayer for a direction to the OPs to release of the connection immediately and also to pay compensation for the mental agony and harassment suffered by him.
3. On being put to notice, the OPs appeared and filed the written version. It is alleged that the complainant is not the owner of the land and the same is owned by Akhara Dharam Dhaja Nirmla Sadha as he failed to submit any document regarding any legal status in respect of the said agricultural land.It is admitted that the complainant had applied for the release of the connection on 30.3.2007 and deposited Rs.1500/-as fee alongwith the application. It is also admitted that vide memo no.730 dated 19.2.2014 a demand notice was issued, vide which the complainant was directed to submit the test report after making compliance of the conditions as mentioned in the same. It is stated that the complainant submitted the test report after a period of two years alongwith some documents. The factum of deposit of Rs.50/- in Government Treasury as Chief Electrical fee for checking the installation of the connection and the submission of affidavit dated 29.3.2016 are also admitted. It is averred that the complainant is not the owner of the minimum agricultural land as is required to release the connection, as per latest policy of the OPs. It is further averred that till the fulfillment of the required formalities, the applicant/complainant is not entitled to seek the release of the connection.There is no deficiency of service on the part of the OPs. After denying all other averments made in the complaint, prayer has been made to dismiss the complaint.
4. On being called to do so, the ld. counsel for the complainant has tendered in evidence affidavit of the complainant, Ex.CA, affidavit of Mahant Jasvir Singh, Ex.CB, alongwith documents Exs.C1 to C18 and closed the evidence of the complainant.
The ld.counsel for the OPs tendered in evidence Ex.OPA affidavit of Sh.Santokh Singh,SDO/Operation Sub Division Badshahpur and closed the evidence.
5. We have heard the ld.counsel for the parties, gone through the written arguments filed by the ld. counsel for the complainant and have also gone through the record of the case, carefully.
6. The ld. counsel for the complainant has submitted that on 30.3.2007, the complainant, vide application No.5262 applied for 7.1/2 BHP power connection, for irrigation purposes by depositing Rs.1500/-as security with the OPs. He also completed all the requisite formalities but inspite of that the Ops did not release the connection till yet.
7. The ld. counsel for the Ops has submitted that the receipt of the application from the complainant, the complainant vide demand notice no.730 dated 19.1.2014, was asked to complete certain formalities. In term No.20, printed on the back side of the demand notice,Ex.C2, it is mentioned that the applicant has to provide the Fard showing that the applicant is the owner and is in possession of one acre or more than one acre land and if there are more than one owner of the said land, then the applicant shall furnish the ‘No Objection certificate’ of the other co-owners.In term No.21, it is further mentioned that the applicant has to give an undertaking to the effect that he/she has no tubewell connection in Punjab. From the fard/jamabadi, Ex.C15, placed on record by the complainant, it is evident that the said land for which the complainant has applied for electric connection for irrigation purpose, is owned by Akhara Dharamdhaja Nirmlasadha. Thus he is not entitled to get the electric connection .
8. From the perusal of the copy of affidavit of Sh. Dhani Ram, complainant, Ex.C4, it is evident that in the said affidavit Sh.Dhani Ram has deposed that he had applied for electric connection for tubewel, for his less than 5 acres of agricultural land, under the general category, vide application No.5262 dated 30.3.2007. He further deposed that he would get installed the said motor connection, in the land owned by him. From the perusal of the copy of jamabandi Ex.C15, it is evident that the land for which, the complainant has applied for release of electric connection for the tubewel, is owned by Akhara Dharamdhaja Nirmalasadha and not by the complainant. In condition No.13.7(vi) of Electricity Supply Instructions Manual, first edition,2010,produced by the ld. counsel for the Ops at the time of arguments, which is marked as ‘A’, it is mentioned that “ For release of tubewell connection under General Category or any of the priority categories, a land holding of minimum one acre of land shall be required”. Since the complainant has failed to show that he is the owner of the land in question, therefore, no directions can be issued to the Ops for the release of the electric connection as sought for by the complainant. The complaint filed by the complainant is thus dismissed being devoid of merits. Parties are left to bear their own cost. Certified copies of the order be sent to the parties free of cost under the Rules.Thereafter, file be indexed and consigned to the Record Room.
ANNOUNCED
DATED:8.6. 2017
NEENA SANDHU
PRESIDENT
NEELAM GUPTA
MEMBER
