This complaint has been filed by one Raju Paswan U/S 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 claiming house building grant against the Opposite Parties.

The case of the complainant in short is that he was selected for fully damaged house due to cyclone by the four man’s committee which was formed to submit the list of cyclone affected people at Lahutara-II Gram Panchayat. His Sl. No. is 98 according to the said committee report. The complainant is the account holder of OP no. 3/ Mini bank and his account no. is 10106175. But the name of the complainant did not appear in bill scroll submitted by the OP no. 1/ Gram Panchayet Pradhan. The complainant knew from the reply of RTI petition that one Habijuddin withdrew the grant from the complainant’s bank account as it was submitted by the OP no. 1 in the name of the said person. Knowing the fact,  the  complainant informed the matter to the OP no.1/Pradhan of concerned Gram Panchayet and OP no. 2/ B.D.O., Karandighi Block but all in vain. So, this complaint has been filed by the complainant praying for a direction upon the opposite parties to pay the amount of `2,939/- together with compensation of `10,000/-.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             

The opposite parties made their appearance have not contested the case finally. So, the case was heard ex-parte against the opposite parties.

Decision with reason

          The complainant in support of his case has produced certain documents, which includes 1) Xerox copy of Inspection Report of four man,s committee , 2) Received copy of letter issued to the BDO dated 7.9.11, 3) Reply of RTI from appropriate authority along with documents 4) Xerox copy of front page of bank pass book, 5) Letter from Pradhan dated15.12.11.

Now, we do find from the case of the complainant and from the documents he has produced in this case that he was selected as a beneficiary for getting fully damaged house grant by the Four man’s selection committee and his name did exist against Sl. No. 98 in the report submitted by the said committee and accordingly he was entitled to get grant of `2,939/- . But due to some mysterious reason his name did not appear at the bill scroll which was prepared and submitted by the OP no. 1 /Pradhan. In lieu of his name another name was entered in the complainant’s bank account number and that very person named Habijuddin, S/o Banu Sk@ Kanu sk withdrew partly damaged claim from this account. The letter dated 15.12.11 issued by OP no. 1 to the complainant and OP no. 2 is also supports the case. The complainant duly informed the entire facts to the opposite parties time to time but they did not bother to provide appropriate remedies to the complainant. For the sake of argument if there was a printing or typological mistake committed by OP no. 1; how it is possible a banker passed the amount to other person who did not possess the valid pass book as well as valid number or is it possible a banker issue same account number to his two separate clients from the same branch; it is quite surprising to us.  So, we can say there is a good nexus between OP no. 1 and OP no. 3 for misappropriating the public money for their illegal gain. On the other hand, knowing it fully all opposite parties kept mum which tantamount to gross negligence of service.

Therefore, considering the circumstances, when the opposite parties did not settle the claim shortly after receiving letter of intimation dated 07.09.11 and 12.10.11 and the instant case has been instituted on 13.01.12 long after the intimation this Forum is of the view that there was delay and causing mental pain and harassment and it amounts to deficiency of service as defined under Section 2(1)(g) & (o) of the C.P. Act, 1986.  

 So, the complainant is entitled to get an order as prayed for.

Hence, it is

ORDERED

That the consumer complaint No. 03/2012 is allowed ex-parte against the opposite parties who are jointly and severally liable to pay the Awarded Sum with cost of ` 1,000/-.

That the complainant is entitled to get `2,939/- (Rupees two thousands nine hundred and thirty nine only) towards the payment of house building grant as cyclone victim from the OP no.1. The complainant is also entitled get an order for compensation of `5,000/- (rupees five thousand only) from the OP no.1 and `5,000/- (rupees five thousand only) from OP no.2 for inaction and/or deficiency of service. These total amounts (` 1000+ 2,939+ 5,000+5,000) = `13,939/- (Rupees thirteen thousand nine hundred and thirty nine only) also be paid within one month from the date of this order. In default an interest at the rate of 9% p.a. shall be levied till full satisfaction.

In case of non-payment of the aforesaid amount in the manner stated above, the complainant may put the order into execution.

Let true photocopy of this final order be supplied to the complainant and send same copy to the opposite parties through registered post with A/D at free of cost.