DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM

Civil Station, Palakkad – 678001, Kerala

Dated this the 30^th day of April, 2010

Present: Smt.Seena.H, President

Smt.Preetha.G.Nair, Member

Smt.Bhanumathi.A.K, Member

CC.No.200/2003

M.Giridharan,

S/o.Devaki Amma,

Mangattu,

Puthan Veedu,

Nellikattil.P.O,

Koottanad,

Ottapalam. - Complainant

(By Adv.K.K.Sudheer)

Vs

1. The Assistant Executive Engineer,

K.S.E.B,

Chalisseri,

Palakkad.

(By Adv.L.Namassivayan)

2. The Secretary,

K.S.E.B,

Vydhyuthi Bhavan,

Pattom, Thiruvananthapuram - Opposite parties

(By Adv.L.Namassivayan)

O R D E R

By Smt.Preetha.G.Nair, Member

Complainant in this case had approached the opposite party for domestic connection on 09.01.2001. He had paid Rs.200/- and Rs.525/- towards fees. The opposite party informed him that since there was 40 meter distance from his house to the nearest electric post they must instal another electric post for him. But now the opposite party had provided connection to his neighbours which is only 30 meter

away. So there is no necessity to put an additional post. So the complainant filed another application to the Board informing about those facts. But there was no response from their part. So he filed a petition before the Additional District Magistrate, Palakkad who has passed an order in the said petition and it was communicated to the opposite party. But still they had not done anything in the matter. Hence the complainant had approached before the forum seeking a compensation of Rs.10,000/- for the deficiency in service on the part of opposite party.

Opposite party filed version contending the following. Opposite party contended that the complaint is not maintainable without impleading the Secretary of the Board as a party in the proceedings and the same has to be dismissed for non joinder of necessary parties. The Board had inspected the site and had taken necessary steps to provide connection to the complainant under O.Y.C scheme. The fee was fixed as Rs.12,000/- and notice was issued to complainant to remit the amount. Accordingly sanction was also granted by the opposite party. Since the complainant had not paid the said amount he could be provided connection only as per seniority basis. His neighbours were provided connection only as per their priority. Board has sanctioned order to provide connection only upto May 2000. Attempts have been taken to provide connection to those consumers who had applied till December 2000. The above complainant has filed application for connection only on 09.01.2001. So the complainant has to wait for his priority list. Moreover there is objection from the complainant's neighbours regarding property

crossing also. They had filed objection to the Board stating their objections. The opposite party had also filed reply to the order of the Collector stating that they could not provide connection as directed by him. Moreover the complainant is not a consumer of the Board and hence there is no deficiency in service on their part. Connection can be provided to the consumer only if he is prepared to opt the O.Y.C scheme by paying Rs.12,000/- otherwise he will have to wait as per the priority list. There is no willful delay on the part of opposite party. Hence complaint has to be dismissed.

Forum dismissed the complaint on the findings that there was no deficiency in service on the part of opposite party and the complaint is bad for non-joinder of necessary party, on 30.11.2004. But the complainant preferred an appeal No.138/2005 before the Hon'ble State Commission and the State Commission has remanded back the case to the forum for fresh disposal.

Both the parties appeared before the forum. Complainant filed an application for impleading 2^nd opposite party, the Secretary, KSEB, Thiruvananthapuram. Application allowed and 2^nd opposite party filed version stating that they are adopting the same contention raised by the 1^st opposite party.

Both parties filed affidavit. Exts.A1 and A2 marked on the side of complainant and Ext.B1 to B7 marked on the side of opposite parties.

Issues to be considered are;

1. Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties?

2. If so, what is the relief and cost?

    

Issues 1 & 2:

We perused relevant documents on record. As per Ext.A1 and A2 it is an admitted fact that the complainant had paid Rs.200/- and Rs.525/- towards fees on 09.01.2001. According to Ext.B7 the property of Smt.Prameela is nearest to the complainant's property. Also the opposite parties admitted that the complainant has produced the consent letter of Smt.Prameela along with the application. At that time opposite parties informed that there was 40 meter distance from his house to nearest electric post. As per Ext.B1 the 1^st opposite party inspected the site and had taken necessary steps to provide connection to the complainant under OYC scheme on December 2002. The opposite parties stated that the complainant's neighbours filed objections regarding property crossing. Further opposite parties admitted that electric connection to the complainant's neighbours, which is only 30 meter away is given only for agricultural purpose. Also opposite parties stated that the complainant had waited as per the priority list and this was not given through the agricultural list. But the opposite parties has not produced documentary evidence to show the rules of agricultural connection. Finally opposite parties admitted that as per the priority list electric connection was given to the complainant on 05.03.2005. In short the complainant applied for electric connection on 09.01.2001 and connection was given on 05.03.2005. Thus the complainant waited for electrics

connection for 4 years and 55 days. According to Sec 8 (2) (a) of the Kerala Electricity Supply Code, 2005, time frame for providing supply: Supply where distributing main requires extension. After the receipt of application as provided in clause 5, if the licensee finds that the supply of electricity to premises applied for requires extension of electric lines, the licensee shall work out expenses, if any, for such extension subject to clause 7(1) and intimate the applicant within 15 days of receipt of application.

No documentary evidence was produced by the opposite parties to show that they have prepared cost estimates or inspected the applicants premises within 15 days of receipt of application. In this case the opposite parties stated that the complainant had produced the application along with the consent letter of Smt.Prameela. According to Ext.B1, the opposite parties informed the complainant that electric connection can be provided only if he is prepared to opt the OYC scheme by paying Rs.12,000/- otherwise he will have to wait as per the priority list in the year of 2002 mentioned in Ext.B1. The opposite parties has not produced the priority list to prove that the complainant's turn came only on 05.03.2005. According to Ext.B7 the complainant can take electric connection through Prameela's property or special line ended in the public way. No documentary evidence was produced by the opposite parties to show that the complainant had not allowed for taking electric connection through special line or through Prameela's property. In view of the above discussions we hold the view that there is deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties.

In the interest of natural justice the complaint is allowed. We direct the opposite parties jointly and severally liable to pay Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten thousand

only) as compensation and Rs.2,000/- (Rupees Two thousand only) as cost of the proceedings. Order shall be complied within one month from the date of receipt of

the order failing which the whole amount shall carry interest @ 9% p.a from the date of order till realisation.

Pronounced in the open court on this the 30^th day of April, 2010

Seena.H,

President

Preetha.G.Nair,

Member

Bhanumathi.A.K,

Member

Appendix

Witnesses examined on the side of complainant

Nil

Witnesses examined on the side of opposite parties

Nil

Exhibits marked on the side of complainant

Ext.A1 – Money receipt for service connection

Ext.A2 (Series) – Photo copy of the applications submitted by the complainant to

opposite party and Collector

Exhibits marked on the side of opposite parties

Ext.B1 – Reply notice issued by opposite party to the complainant

Ext.B2 - Reply notice issued by opposite party to the complainant

Ext.B3 – Copy of the instruction sent by District Collector to complainant

Ext.B4 – Reply of opposite party to the District Collector

Ext.B5 – Objection letter submitted by 3^rd party

Ext.B6 - Objection letter submitted by 3^rd party

Ext.B7 – Rough sketch of service connection

Cost(Allowed)

Rs.2,000/- (Rupees Two thousand only) allowed as cost to the complainant.