The Complainant has filed this case alleging deficiency-in-service by the O.Ps, where O.P No.1 is the Junior Engineer, Electrical, NESCO, Gopalpur Division, Gopalpur, Balasore, O.P No.2 is the S.D.O, Electrical, NESCO, Bahanaga, Balasore and O.P No.3 is the Executive Engineer, Electrical, NESCO, Soro Division, Soro, Balasore.

                    2. The case of the Complainant in brief is that the Complainant’s husband Late Anirudha Tripathy had deposited Rs.2,208/- (Rupees Two thousand two hundred eight) only on 22.09.2016 in the Office of O.P No.1 for supply of electric to his L.I point for the purpose of agriculture (pisciculture) and the O.Ps have given assurance to him that after deposit of the said amount, the electric connection shall be supplied to his L.I point within 7 days. During his life time when the electric supply to his L.I point had not been connected, the husband of the Complainant had approached several times to the O.Ps for above said electric connection, but the O.Ps did not pay any heed to it and at last, the husband of the Complainant (Depositor) died. Thereafter, the Complainant also approached several times to the O.Ps for the said electric connection, but the O.Ps did not take any steps to supply electric connection to the said L.I point, for which the Complainant has suffered mental agony and financial loss. So, the Complainant on dtd.24.08.2018 served a legal notice to the O.Ps by Regd. post with A/D requesting them to take necessary steps for supply of electric connection to the said L.I point as early as possible. But the O.Ps after receiving of the said legal notice, have neither replied nor supplied the electric connection to the said L.I point of the Complainant, which amounts to deficiency of service on the part of the O.Ps. Then on dtd.05.12.2018, the O.Ps have refused the Complainant to supply the electric connection to the said L.I point, for which the Complainant has filed this case against the O.Ps in this Forum for necessary relief. Cause of action to file this case arose on 24.08.2018 and on 05.12.2018. The Complainant has prayed for supply of electric connection to her L.I point along with compensation and litigation cost.

                    3. Though the O.Ps have appeared in this case through their Advocate, but they have not filed their written version. The Advocate for O.Ps was present at the time of hearing of this case and also has participated in hearing.

                    4. In order to substantiate their claim, both the Parties have filed certain documents as per list. It has been argued on behalf of the Complainant that after deposit of the required amount before O.P No.1 by the husband of the Complainant for supply of electric connection to the L.I point for the purpose of agriculture, the O.Ps did not comply the same and after his death, in spite of several requests made by the Complainant, the O.Ps remained silent, for which there is deficiency of service on the part of the O.Ps. The relevant receipt regarding deposit of the amount has been filed by the Advocate for Complainant as Annexure-1. In support of his argument, the Advocate for the Complainant has relied upon the authority reported in 2009 (1) CPR 236 in the case of Punjab State Electricity Board through its Senior Executive Engineer, District Sangrur (Vrs.) Bansal Industries through its two partners Shri Amrish Bansal and Kamal Bansal, wherein it has been held by the Hon’ble Punjab State C.D.R Commission, Chandigarh that when a Consumer complaints against working of electricity meter, the Electricity Board is duty bound to get it tested by M.E Lab or send it to Chief Electric Inspector for analysis and examination. But, after going through such authority and facts of the case in hand, I found that the facts and circumstances of the case decided by the authority as reported and the facts and circumstances of the present case in hand are not similar in nature. The xerox copy of the legal heir certificate has been filed by the Advocate for Complainant vide Annexure-5, where there are four legal heirs including the Complainant-the wife along with two major sons and one major daughter. But, they are not made Party in this case by the Complainant for the best reason known to her, for which the case suffers for non-joinder of necessary Parties. The Advocate for the O.Ps has argued that neither the Complainant nor her husband during his lifetime, have complied with the provisions of the Orissa Electricity Regulatory Commission Distribution (Conditions of Supply) Code, 2004, for which she is not entitled to get any relief.

                    5. So, now on careful consideration of all the materials available in the case record and on the basis of principle laid down by the above Authority as discussed earlier, I am in the opinion that the Complainant is not entitled to get any relief as prayed for and accordingly, this Consumer case is liable to be dismissed. Hence, ordered:-

                                                     O R D E R

                         The Consumer case is dismissed on contest against the O.Ps, but in the peculiar circumstances without cost.

                         Pronounced in the open Forum on this day i.e. the 8th day of November, 2019 given under my Signature & Seal of the Forum.