The Complainant has filed this case against the OPs and praying for the following Order/ Reliefs :-

1. Direction against the O.Ps to remove or shift the Electricity Pole from the disputed location.
2. Direction against the O.Ps to execute or render the service as early as possible for which the Complainant has paid Rs. 34,384/-.
3. Direction against the O.Ps to pay a sum of Rs. 50,000/- to the Complainant as litigation cost, compensation for his harassment and injury to his safety and comfort.

4. Any other relief or reliefs to which the Complainant is entitled as per law.

Brief facts of the Complainant

1. The Complainant is a peace loving and law abiding citizen of India having his residence within the jurisdiction of this Commission.
2. That, the Complainant is a Consumer of the OPs since long having his Consumer Id No. 422084036(Photocopy of Electric Bill is Annexure I).
3. That, the Complainant is owner of Plot of land being in no. 412/925 under Mouza Sikarpur, BL &LRO – Rajganj (Photocopy of LR Khatian is Annexure II).
4. That, the Complainant is residing on the said plot of land with his family members in a two storied Pucca House.
5. That, few years back the WBSEDCL has installed a pucca electricity pole at the east boundary on the land of the Complainant.
6. That, at the time of installation of that electricity pole the Complainant was not present and without taking any consent of the Complainant the pole was installed by the agent of the WBSEDCL.
7. That, when the Complainant came to know the said installation of electricity pole he verbally stated several times to the Station Manager of Belacoba Gr. Electric Supply, WBSEDCL, Jalpaiguri and requested them to remove that pole from that place but of no result and he was harassed.
8. That, the said pole is so closed to the house of the Complainant which affects the safety and comfort of the Complainant and his family members.
9. That, on 16.04.2018, the Complainant submitted a written application to the Station Manager, of Belacoba Gr. Electricity Supply, WBSEDCL, Jalpaiguri with a request to shift the Electric Pole from that place. (Photocopy of application is Annexure III).
10. That, as per instruction of the Authorities, the Complainant paid a sum of Rs. 34,384/- on 02.02.2019 to the OPs through Belacoba Customer            Care  Centre vide quotation   no. SM/BLK/SHF/1400/18/00424, dated 02.02.2019 to execute the work of pole shifting (Photocopy of Quotation and money receipt are Annexure IV).
11. That, in spite of receiving the quotation amount the authorities are reluctant to shift the Pole and till 11.05.2023, the Complainant on several occasions verbally requested the authorities to the execute service of pole shifting but was refused.
12. That, at present, the Complainant and his family members are residing in their house in a perilous situation.
13. That, the Complainant is a Consumer within the meaning of Consumer Protection Act and the cause of action for filing the present complaint arose on 02.07.2019 and thereafter all subsequent dates which is still continuing.  

In support of the Complaint the Complainant has filed the following documents:-

1. Photocopy of Electricity Bill (Annexure I)
2. Photocopy of Land Deed and LR Khatian (Annexure II).
3. Photocopy of Written application for pole shifting (Annexure III).
4. Photocopy of quotation and money receipt (Annexure IV).

Notice was issued from this Commission for serving the same upon the O.Ps. On receipt of notice the both the OP appears through Vokalatnama, filed their Written Version, denied all the material allegations of the Complainant. In the Written Version OPs have stated that, the case is not maintainable either in law or in facts / the case is barred by the law of limitation, estoppels and acquiescence / the case is barred as the provision of Electricity Act 2003 and Indian Telegraph Act The OPs have also stated in the written version that the statements made in para no. 5 to 19 of the Complaint are false and denied by the OPs and the Complainant is not a Consumer within the meaning of CP Act / the case is bad for want of necessary parties / in the statements of para no. 5 to 15 the OP submits that, the pole was installed prior to construction of building of the Complainant / the pole is lying on the land of Government not on the land of Complainant / the Consumer Commission has no jurisdiction to adjudicate the matter in controversy / the application for shifting electric pole was received from the Complainant and he consented to bear the cost of shifting

the pole. It is further stated in the written version that, after receiving the application from the Complainant a survey was conducted and provisional quotation amount of Rs. 34,384/- was served to the Complainant on 02.02.2018and he paid the quotation amount vide money receipt no. 13280376 3698. It is also stated by the OPs that, after receiving the quotation amount, several attempts were made by Belacoba CCC to shift the

Electric Pole at the preferred location of the Complainant but it could not be done due to strong resistance by the local people, they submitted collective petition on 16.11.2019 for stop the work of shifting and Belacoba CCC had sent letter to the Complainant through India Post informing him about the petition and also requesting him to sought out the issue with local people and informed the clearance to Belacoba CCC but they have not received further communication from the Complainant till 23.06.2023. By filing the Written version the OP prays for dismissal of this case.

Having heard, the Ld. Advocate of both the parties and on perusal of the Complaint, Written Version of the OPs and documents of the parties the following points are taken to be considered by this Commission for discussion.

POINTS FOR CONSIDERATION :-

1. Whether the Complainant is a Consumer?
2. Whether the case is maintainable under the Consumer Protection Act 2019?
3. Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of the O.P’s. as alleged by the Complainant?
4. Whether the Complainant is entitled to get the relief as prayed for?                                           

          DECISION WITH REASONS

  All the points are taken up together for discussion to avoid unnecessary repetition and for the sake of convenience and brevity of this case.

                          The Complainant was given liberty to adduce evidence before this Commission. In order to prove the case the Complainant has adduced evidence in the form of an affidavit. In the written deposition the Complainant has stated,/ corroborated the entire contents of his complaint.

               In the written evidence the Complainant has stated on which day he made an application before the OPs for shifting of the pole, on which day he deposited the quotation amount of Rs. 34,384/- to the OPs and also stated on which day he filed this case.

                          At the time of argument, Ld. Advocate of the Complainant argued that, the Complainant has been able to prove the case against the OPs not only through written deposition but also by producing documents, before this Commission. It is further argument of the Complainant that, the Complainant submitted a written application to the SS Belacoba Gr. Electric Supply of  WBSEDCL on 16.04.2018 requesting for shifting the electric pole and on receiving that application the OP conducted survey and issued quotation, asked the Complainant to pay quotation amount of Rs. 34, 384 /-. It is also argued that, the Complainant paid the amount to the OP but they did not execute the service of shifting of pole and on request by the Complainant they refused and on 05.11.2019 the OP No. 1 sent one written notice to the Complainant informing him to refuse to execute the service of pole shifting relying upon collective objection petition made by few persons claiming them to be local though they are not local residents. It is also argument of the Complainant that, without conducting proper survey or enquiry and without informing the difficulties of pole shifting the Complainant was charged for the quotation amount of Rs. 34,384/- and the same was great deficiency of service on the part of OPs.

                          In order to falsify the case of the Complainant the OPs have adduced evidence and in their written evidence, they support their written version. In the evidence both the OPs have admit that, as per their quotation the Complainant had deposited the quotation amount but the OPs have further stated that, they on several occasions attempted to shift the pole at the preferred location of the Complainant but the same was not materialised due to strong objection raised by local people.

                          At the time of argument, Ld. Advocate of the OPs argued that, there was no deficiency of service on the part of the OPs and the Complainant has failed to prove the case against the OPs. It is further argument of the OPs that, they were very much ready to execute the work of pole shifting and

              they on several occasion attempted to shift the pole but the local people raised objection who submitted collective petition on 06.11.2019. It is also argument of the OPs that, the pole in question was installed long before the construction of building of the Complainant and the pole is lying on the land of the government, not on the land of the Complainant. It is also argument of the OPs that, they are very much ready to return the quotation money. At the time of argument, Ld. Advocate of the OPs has referred one decision of the Hon’ble High Court at Calcutta passed in WPA No. 2732 of 2022 wherein the Hon’ble Court has rejected the prayer of the petitioner for shifting poles.

                          Having heard the Ld. Advocate of both the sides and on perusal of the evidence in record, it is admitted fact that, the Complainant has submitted an application on 16.04.2018 to the SS of Belacoba Gr. Electric Supply of WBSEDCL requesting for shifting one electric pole. It is also admitted fact that, the OP subsequently issued quotation asking the Complainant to deposit the quotation amount of Rs. 34,384/- . It is also admitted fact that, the Complainant has paid the said quotation amount. It is also admitted fact that, till today the work of shifting of pole has not been done by the OPs, only dispute is that, whether the OPs are not able to shift the pole due to objection raised by the local people?

                          Let us see how far the Complainant has been able to prove its case against the OPs and how far the OPs have been able to falsify the case of the Complainant or not?

            In the case in hand, it is admitted fact by both the parties that, the Complainant paid the quotation amount on 02.02.2019 and the OPs by sending a notice to the Complainant on 06.11.2019 disclosed their inability to perform the work of shifting of electric pole. In the evidence of OPs it is not explained as to why they issued quotation for shifting the electric pole? The OPs have failed to explain before this Commission whether prior to issuance of quotation survey was conducted by them or not? Had the survey was conducted by the surveyor why in the survey report there was no mention of any objection allegedly raised by the local people?

            From the documents filed by the Complainant and from the answer given by the parties to the questionnaires it is presumed that, without holding any enquiry or without conducting survey and without informing the Complainant about the difficulties of shifting electric pole the OP issued the quotation and charged for quotation amount of Rs. 34,384/- from the Complainant and that act of the OPs are nothing but the deficiency of service who deliberately did not refund the quotation amount of Rs. 34,384/- to the Complainant till today though they are not able to shift the electric pole as per quotation. In the case in hand the provisions of Electricity Act, 2003 and Telegraph Act, 1885 and the decision referred on the side of the OPs are not applicable to the facts and circumstances of this case as this case is purely based on Consumer disputes. The OPs have tried to thwart the case of the Complainant by adducing evidence but has failed.

            Considering all, we are of the view that, the Complainant has been able to prove its case against the OPs to the effect that, there was deficiency of service on the part of the OPs and both the OPs are jointly and severally liable to pay the awarded amount.

Hence, it is,

                                                            ORDERED

That, the instant Consumer Case being in no. 30 of 2023 is hereby allowed on contest but in part. The OPs are directed to refund the sum of Rs. 34,384/- (Rupees Thirty Four Thousand Three Hundred Eighty Four) only to the Complainant which was paid towards the quotation amount. The OPs are also directed to pay a sum of Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand) only to the Complainant towards compensation as well as cost of legal proceedings. The OPs are directed to pay a sum of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) in the Consumer Legal Aid Account of this Commission.

The OPs are further directed to pay interest @ 4% per annum to the Complainant with effect from 02.02.2019 (when the Complainant paid the quotation amount) till making payment of the awarded amount.

The OPs are directed to pay the awarded amount within 45 days from this day failing which the Complainant will have the liberty to take proper steps as per law.

Let a copy of this order be given to the parties at free of cost.