Orissa

Debagarh

CC/24/2018

Premraj Sahu, S/O-Arajlal Sahu - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Junior Engineer/Asst. Engineer, Public Health Dept. - Opp.Party(s)

06 Sep 2018

ORDER

IN THE COURT OF THE PRESIDENT, DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, DEOGARH.

COMPLAINT CASE NO: 24/2018.

Present- Sri Dipak Kumar Mahapatra, President, Smt. Jayanti Pradhan, Member (W) and Smt. Arati Das, Member.

 

Premraj Sahu, aged 40 yrs,

S/O-Arajlal Sahu,

At-Lalusahi, P.O/P.S/Dist/- Deogarh.              ….               Complainant.

                                -Versus-

 

The Junior Engineer/Assistant Engineer,

Public Health Dept.

At-Lalusahi, P.O/P.S/Dist/- Deogarh               ….               Opp.Party.

 

For the Complainant    : -     Nemo.

For the Opp.Party         :-      Nemo.

 

DATE OF HEARING: 14.08.2018, DATE OF ORDER: 06.09.2018.

Sri Dipak Kumar Mahapatra, President:- Brief facts of the case is that the Complainant is the father of the consumer named Bikash Kumar Sahu who has availed water connection in his name to his house located at Traffic Chowk Deogarh vide consumer No- D-05040009 and paid water supply bill up to date.  As the said water connection became disconnected for any reason he has made complain to the O.P who has directed him to excavate the pipe line by his own labour and inform the O.P to repair it. Again the O.P asked the Complainant that according to Water Works Rule-1980; he has to born the labour and material cost of own and informs the O.P who thereafter depute his staff to repair the said pipe line. But the O.P did not respond it. Again the O.P pointed that the pipeline connection was availed by the Complainant under Domestic Category but he is using the same for Commercial purposes which is violating the terms and conditions of Water Works Rule-1980.

Points of Determination-

1. Whether the Complainant comes under the purview of Consumer?
2. Whether the O.P has committed any Deficiency in Service to him?

We have gone through the averments of the complaint petition, which is filed with an affidavit, copy of the documents relied by the complainant and arrives to a conclusion that the complainant is a consumer of the O.P according to section 2(d)(ii) of C.P Act-1986.Though the water supply made to the house of the Consumer under Domestic Category he is using it for his jewelers shop which is a commercial set up. Hence he is violating the rules formulated by the Govt. of Orissa. Again the O.P has strictly informed that according to the guidelines of Water Rule-1980, the Complainant has to born the labour and material cost of own and informs the O.P who thereafter depute his staff to repair the said pipe line. As the O.P cannot act beyond the guidelines he has not committed any “Deficiency in Service” U/S-2(1)(O) under C.P Act-1986 to the Complainant.

ORDER

Petition is disallowed being devoid of any merit with order to no cost.

          Order pronounced in the open court today i.e, on 6^th day of September 2018 under my hand and seal of this forum.

Office is directed to supply free copies of the Order to the parties free of costs receiving acknowledgement of the delivery thereof.

  I agree,                           I  agree,

                               

MEMBER.(W)                     MEMBER.                          PRESIDENT.

                                Dictated and Corrected

                                            by me.

 

 

                                                PRESIDENT.