By Sri Asish Deb, President

This  case has been filed by the complainant against the OP  with the prayer for  direction upon the op for giving connection of electricity and other reliefs .

Brief facts as averred in the complaint is that she applied before the OP for an electric connection  in her dwelling house being application No. 2001801071 along with all other formalities as per rules. On receipt of the application  the  Office of the OP deputed authorized person for necessary inspection and also they contended to give electric connection to the premises of the complainant.

The Op issued quotation being  No. 2001801071/Quot/03/134 dated ;26.05.2015 for a new service connection. The petitioner deposited Rs. 350/- on 26.05.2015 towards the security deposit and  Rs. 400/- for service connection  charge vide two money receipts No. 129501173644  and 128701172063.  The Office of the OP assured that the new service connection would be installed within one month thereof. The petitioner submitted a hand sketch map showing feasibility to draw the overhead electric line at her premises.  But inspite of several times and tagid the OP did not install the electric connection. After several request the Op authority put a pole in the place of the petitioner in March, 2018 but no other progress was done till date. On 21.02.2018 and lastly on 02.04.2018 the petitioner met the OP and requested to do the needful but no result came out.  It is the specific allegation of the complainant that intentionally and deliberately the Op did not give the electric connection in the premises of the complainant. The complainant has also annexed a hand sketch map showing passage for electric connection in her premises from the public road.

Upon service of notice the OP appeared and contested the complaint case by filing a written version denying all the material allegations save and except which are specifically admitted and prayed for dismissal of the case on various grounds. The specific case of the OP is that after depositing of the quotation money, inspection was done by the agency of the OP and it was revealed that the service could be effected by erection of one pole. The agency of the OP visited the spot various times for effecting the service connection but due to local objection the installation could not be effected. Thereafter on 27.03.2018 the OP got a written objection letter from one Dilip  Paul and one Arpita Singh, neighbors  of the petitioner. In spite of that the Agency of the Op had been to the spot for effecting the service connection in the premises of the complainant but again they were restrained by said neighbors of the petitioner and so,  the Op could not execute the installation.  In the above premises on 12.04.2018 the Op issued  a letter to the complainant and   explained why the service connection could not be effected. But till now no satisfactory reply was received from the complainant. Again on 17.08.2018 the Op issued one letter to the complainant and requested to submit an alternative way leave so that the agency of the OP could install the electric connection but till date no satisfactory answer  from the end of the complainant. The Op humbly states that there were no willful latches on their part to give the electric connection in the premises of the complainant and they

C.Case No. 210 of 2018. Page No.3

have prayed for dismissal of the complaint with cost for unnecessary harassment to the Op.

Learned Advocate for the complainant has submitted that Complainant has deposited the required amount as demanded for the electric connection but no proper action was taken by the op for installation of electric connection.

Per Contra: Learned Advocate for the op has contented the op has taken all necessary steps for giving electric connection but the Complainant has failed to submit proper Way Leave for installation of electric connection, in view of resistance put by a few neighbors , demanded by the OP. According to him the instant case is liable to dismissed.

On the basis of the above contentions  of the parties the issues required for consideration are I) whether the case is maintainable and ii) whether the complainant is entitled to get the reliefs as prayed for.

                                                Decision with Reasons.

In Re: I) whether the case is maintainable and ii) whether the complainant is entitled to get the reliefs as prayed for.

Both the issues are taken together for discussion for the sake of brevity and convenience.

We have given thoughtful consideration to the rival contentions of the Learned Counsel. Parties  have been allowed to lead their  evidence in support of their respective case and they have also submitted written arguments. Local Inspection Report has also been made part of the record for better understanding of the situation at the site.

Now,in the case of the Accounts Officer ,Jharkhand State Electricity Board Anr Vs Anwar Ali reported in IV (2007)CPJ (SC) it has been settled by the Hon'ble Apex Court that this Fora have Jurisdiction to deal with grievances of the Consumer of Electricity .Thus ,the instant case is maintainable in law.

Electricity is a basic human need .It is an essential requirement for all walks of life. Thus, protection of the consumer of the electricity is of paramount importance . It is evident from the evidence as reflected in the case that electric connection as requisitioned by the Consumer Complainant has not been given in time. From the local inspection report it has come to light that there would be no obstacle if electric post is erected/installed in front of the house near road beside the drain. It has has also surfaced during hearing of the case that even the complainant is ready to bear the reasonable additional costs ,if any. for any additional pole or iron bar as required by the op as per rule . Therefore. the grievances of the consumer have not been redressed by the Distribution Licensee ,op WBSEDCL in time .The op being  Distribution Licensee has statutory liability to supply electricity. Refusal or delay in giving electric connection even after receipt of deposits amounts to deficiency. Having regards had to the facts and circumstances,we are of the opinion that the complainant is entitled to get the reliefs for order of installation of electric connection to her premises.                                               

            Both the issues are decided in favour of the complainant accordingly.      

Hence, it is

ordered,

             That the complaint case no. 210 of 2018  be and the same is allowed on contest against the Op ,however without costs.

………The op is directed to give Electric Connection to the site as prayed for by the complainant within 45 days from the date of this order.

          The complainant will bear  the reasonable additional costs ,if any ,for any additional pole or iron bar as required by the op as per rule.

       In default of compliance of the order by the  op,the complainant will be entitled to get compensation @ of Rs.5000/-( Five  Thousand ) only per month after expiry of the said 45 days till installation of electricity by the op. The Complainant would be at liberty to put the decree into execution as per law.

            Let copy of the judgment be supplied to both the parties free of cost.