The complainant Sawarnjit Singh (here-in-after referred to as complainant) has filed this complaint U/s 35 of Consumer Protection Act, 2019 (here-in after referred to as 'Act') before this Commission against Punjab State Power Corporation Limited & others (here-in-after referred to as opposite parties).
Briefly stated, the case of the complainant is that complainant applied for tubewell connection under Chairman's Discretionary Quota of the opposite parties. The opposite parties on receipt of all the papers/file and after satisfying themselves about the eligibility of the complainant to get the tubewell electric connection under chairman's discretionary Quota, had sent communication and had sent letter to complainant and it was intimated to him that necessary sanction has been granted and he was asked to deposit Rs. 16,500/-. Thereafter the complainant submitted the required documents to the opposite party No.2 and the complainant was directed to deposit amounts and accordingly the complainant vide receipt No. 49348 dated 29.12.2016 deposited Rs.16,500/-and the complainant also furnished an affidavit/undertaking as required by the opposite parties.
The learned counsel for the complainant has also referred case law of Hon'ble State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Punjab, Chandigarh, in First Appeal No. 555 of 2018 decided on 8-10-2018 in case titled as PSPCL Vs Baltej Singh.
It is alleged that the complainant also completed all the other formalities as required by the opposite parties but no motor connection has been released to him till date inspite of the fact that he repeatedly visited the office of opposite parties but the matter is being postponed by them on one pretext or the other.
It is further alleged that due to non release of connection by the opposite parties, the complainant is suffering mental tension and agony and huge financial loss for which he claims compensation to the tune of Rs.50,000/-.
On this backdrop of facts, the complainant has prayed for directions to the opposite parties to release the electric tubewell connection in favour of the complainant and pay Rs.50,000/- as compensation and Rs. 3300/- as litigation expenses.
Upon notice, opposite parties appeared through counsel and contested the complaint by filing joint written reply raising legal objections that the complaint is not maintainable; complainant has no locus standi or cause of action to file the present complaint; complainant is estopped from filing the present complaint by her act, conduct and acquiescence, this Commission has got no jurisdiction to decide the complaint and that the complaint is false, frivolous and vexatious.
On merits, it has been pleaded that complainant made request for allotment of Tubewell connection under 'Chairman Discretionary quota on priority. His request was accepted by the competent authority.
On merits, the opposite parties have reiterated their version as pleaded in legal objections and detailed above. After cotroverting all other averments of the complainant, the opposite parties prayed for dismissal of complaint and has also relied upon case law reported in 1996 (1) CPR 26 decided by Hon'ble Rajasthan State Consumer Commission, Jaipur.
In support of his complaint, the complainant has tendered into evidence his affidavit dated 10.12.2020 (Ex. C-2) and the document (Ex. C-1).
In order to rebut the evidence of complainant, the opposite parties have tendered into evidence affidavit of Er. Subhash Chander Verma dated 15.7.2021 (Ex. OP-1/1) and clsoer the evidence.
The learned counsel for the parties reiterated their stand as pleaded in their respective pleadings.
We have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the file carefully.
The councel for complainant has argued that the complainant applied under Chairman's Discretionary Quota on priority basis. This fact is not disputed by opposite parties.
It is not the case of opposite parties that the complainant has not fulfilled the conditions. The only plea taken by the opposite parties is that connection could not be issued due to passing of status quo order dated.11-1-2017 for release of connection. However, this Commission is of the considered view that since the complainant has completed all the formalities and had deposited the amounts as per directions of the opposite parties, as such, opposite parties cannot deny the electricity connection to the complainant by taking excuse of the status two order dated 11.1.2017 issued. Moreover, opposite party has not placed on record any such order dated 11.1.2017.
For the reasons recorded above and by relying upon judgement of Hon'ble State Commission, Punjab, Chandigarh, the complaint is partly accepted and the opposite parties are directed to release the tubewell electric connection under Chairman's Discretionary Quota, as already sanctioned/allowed to the complainant after preparation of estimate to deposit actual expenditure as per terms and conditions.
It is made clear that the complainant will be liable to deposit the charges and complete the formalities, if any legally required.
The compliance of this order be made within 60 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order.
The complaint could not be decided within the statutory period due to heavy pendency of cases.
Copy of order be sent to the parties concerned free of cost and file be consigned to the record room.
Announced:-
13-07-2023
- (Lalit Mohan Dogra)
President
(Shivdev Singh)
Member
