BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, SIRSA.
Consumer Complaint no. 97 of 2017
Date of Institution : 01.05.2017
Date of Decision : 26.10.2017
Surinder Kumar Kataria son of Shri Chiman Lal, resident of Delhi Punjab Goods Carrier, Plot No.22, Near Railway Crossing, G.T Road Mandi Dabwali.
……Complainant.
Versus.
- Superintending Engineer, P.H.E.D Circle Sirsa.
- Executive Engineer, P.H.E Division No.1, Sirsa.
- Sub Divisional Engineer, P.H.E Sub Division No.1, Mandi Dabwali.
...…Opposite parties.
Complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act,1986.
Before: SHRI R.L. AHUJA…………………PRESIDENT.
SMT.RAJNI GOYAT……MEMBER.
SHRI MOHINDER PAUL RATHEE……MEMBER.
Present: Sh.R.S. Saxena, Advocate for the complainant.
Sh.Bhani Ram, Sub Divisional Engineer, Mandi Dabwali alongwith Sh. Ajay Kumar, Govt. Pleader for the opposite parties.
ORDER
In brief the case of the complainant is that the office of the Executive Engineer, P.H.E Division No.1, Sirsa, Sub Divisional Engineer, P.H.E sub Division No.1, Mandi Dabwali sanctioned a water and sewer Connection in the name of Shri Chiman Lal son of Shri Puran Chand of Mandi Dabwali. Shri Chiman Lal, after sanction, got done the water and sewer connection by a plumber, approved by P.H.E Department, Haryana and since then regularly paid the water and sewer charges/bills to the department. It is further averred that on the demise of Shri Chiman Lal, his property was devolved among his three sons namely Surinder, Rakesh and Parveen Kataria. As per family settlement, the Godown of Delhi Punjab Goods Carrier a part of deceased property was devolved to the complainant. It is further averred that the complainant was served with a notice by the department on 11.12.2013, by which he was informed that his water connection was not made through proper fruel and the complainant was directed to remove these defects by 16.12.2013, and if failed, his connection will be disconnected and the complainant will have to apply for fresh connection. That surprisingly, the department in furtherance of notice, disconnected the complainant’s water connection in December 2013, even before the notice period was over. It is further averred that complainant approached the department so many times for restoration of water connection, but the department did not restore the water connection nor given any proper reply to the complainant. That the water connection was disconnected by the department and was never restored even then the department raised/issued a water bill amounting to Rs.35,831/- dated 17.08.2016, after two and half years of disconnection. The complainant approached the department so many times and requested to withdraw the present bill and to raise a new bill up to the period when the water connection was disconnected, but the department did not hear him and gave no reply. It is further averred that opposite parties are negligent in performing services on the their part and have caused gross deficiency in service due to which the complainant has undergone unnecessary harassment and mental agony and as such he is entitled to compensation of Rs.50,000/- from the ops. Hence, this complaint for a direction to the ops to withdraw the impugned water bill and to raise a fresh bill and to pay above said amount of compensation to the complainant alongwith litigation expenses.
2. On notice, opposite parties appeared and filed joint reply taking certain preliminary objections regarding maintainability; cause of action and that complainant has instituted this complaint without availing the opportunity for redressal of his grievances, if any before the competent authority as per the notification dated 16.3.2002 notification No.14/74/2010-PH.3; that complainant has suppressed the true and material facts and that this Forum has no jurisdiction to entertain the present complaint. On merits, while denying the contents of the complaint, it is submitted that complainant is not paying the regular bill. The complainant never moved any application before the ops pertaining to the death of Chiman Lal and his legal heirs. It is further submitted that the connection has rightly been disconnected by the ops as complainant did not maintain the connection properly as per clause 6 of the gazette notification. As per clause 6 any insanitary connection if detected by the department shall be disconnected immediately without giving any notice. The above said connection was insanitary at the spot and thus has been rightly disconnected by the department., The complainant never approached to the department for restoration of the connection. It is further submitted that the bill amounting to Rs.35,831/- dated 17.8.2016 is rightly standing against this connection for which complainant is liable to make the payment. With these averments, dismissal of complaint has been prayed for.
3. The complainant produced his affidavit Ex.C1 whereas ops produced affidavit of Sh. Bhani Ram, SDE as Ex.R1, copy of bill Ex.R2, copy of application Ex.R3, copy of notification Ex.R4.
4. We have gone through the record of the case and have heard Shri R.S. Saxena, learned counsel for the complainant and Govt. Pleader for opposite parties assisted by Shri Bhani Ram, SDE.
5. There is no dispute that Surinder Kumar complainant was enjoying water and sewer connection at his premises. The perusal of the record reveal that the public health authorities issued a notice bearing No.403 dated 11.12.2013 to the connection holder whereby the water and sewer connection holder was directed to rectify the lapses by 16.12.2013 and to pay a sum of Rs.6000/- as per clause 5 of the said notice. It has further been stated under clause 10 of the said notice that he is to pay Rs.1000/- on the ground that “Pani ke connection par farul nahin laga he! Farul ka size uchit nahin he” and he was to pay total sum of Rs.7000/-. It has been argued by learned counsel for complainant that before the date of 16.12.2013, his connection was disconnected on 15.12.2013 without giving him proper opportunity to rectify the lapses of his connection. During the course of arguments, it has been argued by Govt. Pleader that the connection was disconnected due to insanitary connection. The complainant has claimed in his complaint that he is ready to pay the genuine water charges till he was having the water connection but he is not liable to pay the charges after the disconnection of his water connection. During arguments, Sub Divisional Engineer and Govt. Pleader could not prove that the water connection holder is liable to pay charges even after the disconnection of his connection. The ops have submitted the outstanding total dues amounting to Rs.53,081/- as on January to June, 2017 against Rs.35,831/- as on 17.8.2016 as per complaint of the complainant. This amount is in additional to penalty of Rs.7000/- till date. Thus, as per claim of the department of the Public Health, total amount recoverable from the water connection holder comes to Rs.60081/- till date. But we do not agree with the contention of the opposite parties and are of the considered opinion that water connection holder is liable to pay water charges penalty etc. till the date of his holding of the connection and he is not liable to pay same after disconnection of his water connection which was disconnected on 15.12.2013.
6. In view of the above, we partly allow the present complaint and set aside the impugned bill issued by the opposite parties. We direct the complainant to pay a sum of Rs.2148/- as claimed by the ops as per Account No.312/1 statement and Rs.7000/- as penalty thus totaling Rs.9148/- within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order and thereafter the ops will issue no dues certificate to the complainant after deposit of the said amount. If the complainant fails to deposit the said amount of Rs.9148/- within above said period of 30 days, then the ops will be at liberty to take suitable action against the water connection holder as per rules and regulations of the department. No order as to costs. A copy of this order be supplied to the parties as per rules. File be consigned to the record room.
Announced in open Forum. Member Member President,
Dated:26.10.2017. District Consumer Disputes
Redressal Forum, Sirsa.
