DATE OF FILING : 26-11-2013.
DATE OF S/R : 27-03-2014.
DATE OF FINAL ORDER : 07-07-2014.
Smt. Philisita Manj,
wife of late Samuel Minj,
residing at 23/3, Nabanaritala 1st Bye Lane.
P.S. Shibpur, District – Howrah,
PIN – 711110.------------------------------------------------------------------- COMPLAINANT.
- Versus -
1. The District Engineer,
CESC Limited, Howrah Regional Office,
433/1, G,T. Road ( North ),
Howrah – 711101.
2. CESC Limited,
having its registered office at
CESC House, Chowringhee Square,
Kolkata – 700 001.
3. Beronika Minj,
wife of late Silbanus Minj,
residing at 12, Kankra Para Lane, P.S. Shibpur,
Howrah – 711104.
4. Smt. Elisaba Kujur,
wife of Sri Parisus Kujur,
residing at 23/3, Nabanaritala 1st Bye Lane,
P.S. Shibpur, District – Howrah,
PIN – 711110.
5. Sri Agnesh Lakra,
residing at 23/3, Nabanaritala 1st Bye Lane, P.S. Shibpur,
Howrah – 711110.-------------------------------------------------OPPOSITE PARTIES.
P R E S E N T
President : Shri T.K. Bhattacharya, M.A. LL.B. WBHJS.
Member : Shri P.K. Chatterjee.
Member : Smt. Jhumki Saha.
F I N A L O R D E R
1. The instant case filed by the complainant U/S 12 of the C .P. Act, 1986 ( as amended upto date ) has prayed for a direction to be given upon the O.P. nos. 1 & 2, CESC Ltd., to install separate new electric meter at the meter room premises situated at 23/3, Nabanaritala 1st Bye Lane, P.S. Shibpur, Howrah – 711110, with the help of police authority and other reliefs as he entitled to.
2. The brief facts of the case is that the complainant applied for separate meter before the o.p. nos. 1 & 2 and also deposited service charges including security money amounting to Rs. 1,550/- to the o.p. nos. 1 & 2 and could not be accelerated due to objection raised by the o.p. nos. 3, 4 & 5. Hence the complaint.
3. The o.p. nos. 1 & 2 vide their written version contending interalia that attempts were made for effecting the new connection through separate meter at the meter room premises and they have not succeeded due to objection raised by the o.p. nos. 3 to 5. They have no latches on their part for effecting installation of new meter at the meter room position at the schedule premises but could not be accelerated due to objection raised by o.p. nos. 3 to 5. They are ready to effect the connection if free access is available and that to they have no latches on their part for which so called deficiency in service does not hold good for which it is prayed to reject the instant petition filed by the complainant with exemplary cost.
4. Notices were served upon the o.p. nos. 3 to 5 but neither they appeared nor they have submitted any written version for which ex parte order is passed against them.
5. Upon pleadings of both parties two points arose for determination :
i) Is there any deficiency in service on the part of the O.Ps?
ii) Whether the complainant is entitled to get any relief and compensation as prayed for?
DECISION WITH REASONS :
6. Both the points are taken up together for active consideration. It is admitted
facts that the complainant complied with all necessary technical formalities together with depositing necessary quotational money to the o.p. nos. 1 & 2, CESC Authority. It appears that the o.p. nos. 1 & 2 being public utility concern is eager to cater the service to the intending consumer i.e. complainant. There is no deficiency in service on their part and nor did they commit any unfair trade practice. Their inability to install the meter was due to the objection raised by the o.p. nos. 3 to 5. We have also considered the written version of o.p. nos. 1 & 2 but the fact remains is that as the present situation, the consumer cannot be deprived from electricity, nor can be forced to live in darkness when all the formalities including MASD Bill paid by him. The objection raised by the o.p. nos. 3 to 5 cannot be sustained at the present situation on some fictitious ground considering electricity is a need based requirement of a civilized person.
5. Considering the above we have our considered opinion that the o.p. nos. 1 & 2 , CESC Authority has no latches and negligence in installing the meter in question and that they are ready to complete the job if free access at the proposed premises is available.
Therefore, we are of the view that this is a fit case where prayer of the complainant shall be allowed.
Points under consideration are accordingly decided.
Hence,
O R D E R E D
That the C. C. Case No. 401 of 2013 ( HDF 401 of 2013 ) be allowed on contest without costs against O.P. nos. 1 & 2, CESC Authority and dismissed ex parte without cost against o.p. nos. 3 to 5.
The O.P. nos. 1 & 2 , CESC Authority be directed to provide new electric connection through separate meter to the complainant at the meter room position as mentioned in the schedule within 30 days from the date of this order.
The o.p. nos. 3 to 5 are hereby restrained from causing any disturbance during installation of the meter.
In case of any illegal objection raised by any person, complainant and o.p. nos. 1 & 2 , CESC Authority shall approach to the local police station for help.
No order as to compensation.
The complainant is at liberty to put the decree into execution after expiry of the appeal period.
Supply the copies of the order to the parties, as per rule.
DICTATED & CORRECTED
BY ME.
( P. K. Chatterjee )
Member, C.D.R.F.,Howrah.
