DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, BARNALA, PUNJAB.

 

Complaint Case No : CC/332/2020

Date of Institution : 09.11.2020

Date of Decision : 27.04.2022

Surjeet Ram @ Surjit Ram, aged about 52 years, son of S. Beer Chand r/o Village Dhaula, Tehsil Tapa, District Barnala. 

…Complainant

Versus

1. Punjab State Power Corporation Limited, Head Office The Mall, Patiala through its Chairman. 

2. The XEN, Punjab State Power Corporation Limited, Barnala. 

3. The SDO, Punjab State Power Corporation Limited, Tapa-2, Tehsil and District Barnala.

…Opposite Parties

Complaint under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986

Present: Sh. Ramandeep Rajput Adv counsel for complainant.

Sh. SK Kotia Adv counsel for opposite parties.

Quorum.-

1. Sh. Ashish Kumar Grover : President

2. Smt. Urmila Kumari : Member

3. Sh. Navdeep Kumar Garg : Member

(ORDER BY URMILA KUMARI MEMBER):

    The complainant Surjeet Ram alias Surjit Ram filed the present complaint under the Consumer Protection Act 1986 against Punjab State Power Corporation Limited, Patiala and others. (in short the opposite parties). 

2. The facts leading to the present complaint as stated by the complainant are that the complainant applied with the opposite parties an AP connection and amount of Rs. 3,500/- was got deposited with the opposite parties vide receipt dated 18.2.2013. Further, in 2016 the opposite party No. 3 suggested the complainant that he will not be eligible to get the motor connection vide the said receipt and introduced a new scheme for release of tubewell connection under Chairman discretionary quota on priority basis and persuaded the complainant to shift his said application into that new released scheme and took the complainant into confidence that the deposited amount will be adjusted. So, the complainant applied for shifting of above connection application under Chairman's discretionary quota on priority basis. The opposite parties issued a letter dated 22.12.2016 to the complainant. In compliance of the said letter the opposite parties got deposited an amount of Rs. 25,100/- vide receipt dated 28.12.2016from the complainant and all the documents as required were also submitted. The complainant owned not less than one acre and not more than five acres of land where the tubewell connection is to be installed. But neither any demand notice has been issued nor the connection has been released to the complainant. The complainant approached the opposite parties many times but to no effect.

3. It is further alleged that on 6.12.2017 the complainant moved an application under RTI Act to the opposite parties to know the status of his application for motor connection and opposite parties sent a letter dated 11.1.2018 alongwith attached letter dated 22.12.2017 and intimated that the connection has not been released to the complainant and there is no objection for release of connection but issuance of tubewell connection has been restrained due to code of conduct for State Legislature Election-2017 and no order has been issued regarding issuance of connection. So, there is deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of opposite parties. The complainant has completed each and every formality as required by the opposite parties. On 18.4.2019 the opposite parties with malafide intention issued a notice dated 18.4.2019 allegedly to be issued on the basis of previous application of the complainant for which the amount of Rs. 3,500/- was got deposited vide receipt dated 18.2.2013, it has been intimated that the complainant has failed to comply with the demand notice dated 31.3.2016. The opposite parties have know that the even after the issuance of alleged demand notice dated 31.3.2016 the opposite parties got shifted the application of the complainant into Chairman Quota on priority basis and required fee had also been got deposited and required documents had also been submitted. So, there is no question to issue any demand notice under the previous application, rather the demand notice is required to be issued under Chairman Quota. Hence, the present complaint is filed seeking the following reliefs.-

1) The opposite parties may be directed to issue demand notice and to release the electricity tubewell connection to the complainant under Chairman Quota on priority basis for which an amount of Rs. 25,100/- vide receipt dated 28.12.2016 has already been deposited and required documents have already been submitted.         

2) To pay Rs. 2,00,000/- on account of compensation for mental agony and harassment. 

3) To pay Rs. 20,000/- as litigation expenses.  

4) Any other fit relief may also be given. 

4. The opposite parties filed written version taking legal objections on the grounds that as per Commercial letter No. 20/2018 issued by Punjab State Power Corporation Limited office of Chief/ Commercial, Patiala dated 14.3.2018 para (b) 1) Cut Off date: Due to large pendency of demand notices already issued no new (Fresh) demand notices against General Category or any priority category AP applicants(Except Newly introduced priority of the Freedom Fighters) shall be issued till further orders. So, the complaint is premature. Further, present complaint is not maintainable and bad for mis joinder of necessary parties. The complainant is estopped from filing the present complaint by his act and conduct and he filed the present complaint just to harass and pressurize the opposite parties. 

5. On merits, the opposite parties submitted that the complainant submitted request to shift his application to CMD quota with his own will. It is admitted that the opposite parties issued a letter dated 22.12.2016 to the complainant and got deposited an amount of Rs. 25,100/- vide receipt dated 28.12.2016 from the complainant and all the required documents also submitted by the complainant with the opposite parties. The complainant also submitted an affidavit duly attested by Executive Magistrate, Tapa in which it is mentioned that if due to shortage of material or any other reason there is delay in my connection I shall not file any case or proceedings against the Powercom. It is submitted that issuance of tubewell connection has been restrained due to code of conduct for state legislature Election 2017 and later on as per Commercial letter dated 14.3.2018 as mentioned above. So, there is no deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of opposite parties. Rest of the contents of the complaint are denied by the opposite parties and lastly prayed for the dismissal of the present complaint with costs.   

6. In support of his complaint, the complainant tendered into evidence his own affidavit Ex.C-1, copy of receipt Ex.C-2, copy of letter Ex.C-3, copy of receipt dated 28.12.2016 Ex.C-4, copy of jamabandi  Ex.C-5, copy of application dated 6.12.2017 Ex.C-6, postal receipt Ex.C-7, copy of letter dated 22.12.2017 Ex.C-8, copy of letter dated 11.1.2018 Ex.C-9, copy of notice dated 18.4.2019 Ex.C-10, affidavit of Surjeet Ram Ex.C-11, copy of order dated 10.2.2020 Ex.C-12, copy of complaint No. 128/19 Ex.C-13 and closed the evidence.  

7. To rebut the case of the complainant, the opposite parties  tendered in evidence affidavit of Er. Satish Bansal Ex.OPs-1, copy of circular dated 13.4.2018 Ex.OPs-2, copy of affidavit of Surjeet Ram  Ex.OPs-3 and closed the evidence.

8. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record on the file. Written arguments also filed by the parties.

9. The complainant applied for an AP connection with the opposite parties and deposited an amount of Rs. 3,500/- with the opposite parties vide book No. E-11342/Receipt No. 244 dated 18.2.2013 annexed as Ex.C-2. As per the complainant on the pursuance of the opposite parties the complainant applied for shifting of above mentioned connection application under the Chairman's Discretionary Quota on priority basis. 

10. ASE/Sales-III PSPCL Patiala approved AP connection under Chairman Discretionary Quota to Sh. Surjeet Ram son of Bir Chand Village Dhaula vide memo No. 48087/Approved CMD Quota-AP/2016/ Bhadour 200/202 dated 22.12.2016 to the complainant as per Ex.C-3. In compliance with the above mentioned letter Ex.C-3 the opposite parties got deposited an amount of Rs. 25,100/- vide receipt book No. 49056 receipt No. 258 dated 28.12.2016 Ex.C-4. The complainant also submitted all the documents including Fard Jamabandi, affidavit, undertaking etc. with the opposite parties.

11. As per the complainant he was never issued a demand notice under Chairman's Discretionary Quota. The complainant moved an application under RTI Act to seek the position of his application for connection Ex.C-7. Additional SE Sub Urban Division Barnala as per letter No. 8563 dated 22.12.2017 intimated that.-

1) No tubewell connection has been released to Surjeet Ram son of Bir Chand.

2) There is no objection for release of connection but issuance of tubewell connection has been restrained due to code of conduct for Assembly Election-2017 and no orders have been issued regarding issuance of connection Ex.C-9. 

12. On the other hand the opposite parties alleged that demand notice No. 2430 dated 31.3.2016 was issued to the complainant on the basis of previous application of the complainant for which the amount of Rs. 3,500/- was got deposited vide book No. E-11342 receipt No. 244 dated 18.2.2013 and the compliance of the same had not been made by the complainant. No copy of the above said demand notice has been tendered by the opposite parties and recorded on the file. 

13. Since the complainant had opted to release his connection under Chairman Discretionary Quota and his application was approved on 22.12.2016. In compliance to that letter the complainant deposited Rs. 25,100/- vide receipt No. 258 dated 28.12.2016 and submitted all the required documents Ex.C-2 to Ex.C-10. But demand notice was not issued by the opposite parties. Hence there is deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties. 

14. In view of the above discussion, present complaint is partly allowed and opposite parties are directed to issue demand notice to the complainant under the Chairman Discretionary Quota and after completing all the necessary formalities and got depositing the requisite fee from the complainant, the opposite parties are directed to release the tubewell connection in favour of the complainant under Chairman Discretionary Quota. The opposite parties are also directed to pay Rs. 5,000/- as compensation for mental tension and harassment and Rs. 3,300/- as litigation expenses. Compliance of this order be made within the period of 45 days from the date of receipt of the copy of this order. Copy of the order be supplied to the parties free of costs. File be consigned to the records after its due compliance.

ANNOUNCED IN THE OPEN COMMISSION:

        27th Day of April 2022

 

 

            (Ashish Kumar Grover)

            President

              

(Urmila Kumari)

Member

 

(Navdeep Kumar Garg)

Member