DATE OF FILING : 10.09.2014.
DATE OF S/R : 30.10.2014.
DATE OF FINAL ORDER : 30.04.2015.
Sri Sudhanshu Bag,
son of Gokul Chandra Bag,
residing at village Bhagabanpur, P.O. Mollahat, P.S. Shyampur,
District Howrah. ………... …..…………………………...……….…... COMPLAINANT.
Versus-
1. Station Manager,
WBSEDCL,
Ajodhya Customer Care Centre Ajodhya, Shyampur,
District Howrah
PIN 711314.
2. Tapan Kumar Ghorai,
son of late Hirulal Ghorai,
residing at village Bhagabanpur, P.O. Mollahat, P.S. Shyampur,
District Howrah,
PIN 711314…………………………………………………………. Opposite Parties.
P R E S E N T
Member In Charge : Smt. Jhumki Saha.
Member : Shri Subrata Sarker.
F I N A L O R D E R
The instant case was filed by complainant U/S 12 of the C.P. Act, 1986 wherein the complainant has prayed for direction upon the o.p. no. 1 for effecting new electric line in his residence as he has no electricity at his scheduled residence and upon o.p. no. 2 not to raise any objection at the time of installation of separate electric meter in the name of the complainant at scheduled premises having LR Dag no. 2148 under L.R. Khatian No. 1452, J.L. No. 110 of Mouza Bhagabanpur, P.S. Shyampur, District Howrah.
Complainant paid the quotational amount of Rs. 540/- to the o.p. no. 1 towards service connection charge and security depositvide Annexures. It is also admitted that o.p. no. 1 went to carry out the job of installation of meter at the residence of the complainant but there was huge objection from the side of o.p. no. 2.So o.p. no. 1 could not install the same. So being frustrated and finding no other alternative, complainant filed this instant complaint.
Notices were served upon the o.ps. Both theo.ps. appeared and filed written version separately. So the case was heard on contest.
4. Upon pleadings of parties two points arose for determination :
i) Is there any deficiency in service on the part of the O.Ps. ?
- Whether the complainant is entitled to get any relief as prayed for ?
DECISION WITH REASONS :
5. Both the points are taken up together for consideration. We have carefully gone through the written versions of the o.ps. and noted their contents. There is no difficulty in effecting the new connection. But due to the objection by the o.p. no. 2, the same could not be executed. Electricity is an emergency service. Light is off life is off. In this modern age, without electricity modern life is simply unthinkable. The objection raised by the o.p. no. 2 is nothing but a measure to deprive the complainant from electricity. As a public utility organization, it is the sole discretion of o.p. no. 1 to provide electric connection to its consumers from the nearest pole. Therefore, we are of the view that this is a fit case where the prayer of the complainant shall be allowed. Both the points are accordingly disposed of.
Hence,
O R D E R E D
That the C. C. Case No. 493 of 2014 ( HDF 493 of 2014 ) be and the same is allowed on contest with costs as against the O.P. no. 2 and dismissed as against the o.p. no. 2.
The O.P. no. 1 be directed to effect new electric connection after observing all official formalities, if any, to the residence of the complainant within 30 days from the date of this after taking necessary police help, if required.
The o.p. no. 2 is strictly directed not to raise any objection at the time of installation of electric connection of the complainant.
The complainant is at liberty to put the decree into execution after the expiry of the appeal period.
Supply the copies of the order to the parties, as per rule.
DICTATED & CORRECTED
BY ME.
( Jhumki Saha )
Member In Charge, C.D.R.F.,Howrah.
