Shankar Majhi,

son of late Fatik Majhi,

village – Panatihal Purbapara,

P.O. Mansinghapur, P.S. Jagatballavpur,

District – Howrah.-----------------------------------------------------------  COMPLAINANT.

-          Versus   -

1.         The Station Manager,

            WBSEDECL, Bargachia Group of Electric Supply,

            Village – Bargachia, P.S. Jagatballavpur,

            District – Howrah,

            PIN – 711404.

2.         The Divisional Manager Howrah ( D ),

Division – II,

WBSEDCL having its office

at  Makardah, P.S. Domjur,

District – Howrah,

PIN – 711409.

3.         The  Chairman,

WBSEDCL, Bidyut Bhawan,

Salt Lake,

Kolkata – 700091.

4.         Bablu Majhi,

Son of RAdhakristo Majhi,

Village – Sadatpur, P.O. Mansinghapur,

P.S. Jagatballavapur,

District – Howrah,

PIN – 711404.------------------------------------------------------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.                  Complainant Sankar Majhi, by filing a petition  U/S 12 of the C .P. Act,

1986 ( as amended up to date ) has prayed for a direction to be given upon the o.ps. to install the electric connection in the premises owned by the complainant.

2.                  Brief facts of the case is that complainant purchased one piece of land with two

brick-built rooms standing thereon covered by  R.T. Shed along with privy and bath, within the R.S. Khatian no. 696, HAL & L.R. Khatian no. 1087, 480, R.S. & L.R. Dag No. 249 Mouza – Mansinghapur, P.S. Jagatballavpur, District – Howrah, located at Panthihal Purbapara vide Annexure ‘A’.  Complainant with his family members are staying at the said premises. Thereafter, complainant applied for electric connection at the said premises to O.P. no. 1. O.P. no. 1 after inspection issued quotation dated 23-09-2011 vide Annexure ‘B’. Complainant as per quotation dated 23-09-2011, deposited Rs. 280/- towards security deposit and Rs. 200/- as service charges on 15-11-2011 with O.P. no. 1 vide money receipt nos. 10198, 10199 dated 15-11-2011 vide Annexure ‘C’. But after that since then, O.P. no. 1 has not taken any proper  step to install the electric connection at the said premises although it is a fact that electric poles are standing at the southern side of the complainant’s building on the public road. It is further stated by the complainant that O.P. no. 4 filed one Misc. petition being no. 190 of 2013 before Executive Magistrate under Section 144 of the Cr. P.C. in connection with the Dag no. 253 which is or was in no way connected with the complainant’s electric connection and no specific order against electric  connection of the complainant has yet been passed by the concerned authority vide Annexure ‘D’. In this respect, complainant sent one lawyer’s letter to O.P. nos. 1 to 3 on 01-03-2013 requesting the authority to install electric meter and supply electricity at the said premises. And O.P. nos. 1 to 3 received the same vide Annexure ‘E’ series. But O.P. nos. 1 & 3 have not taken any step to install new meter and to supply electricity to the complainant’s premises that led to the tremendous problem for the complainant and his family members as they are compelled to spend  days without electricity which is a bare necessity in modern life. Finding no other alternative, complainant has filed this instant petition praying for installation of electric meter and supply of electricity to his premises.

3.                  Notices were served. O.ps. appeared and filed written version. Accordingly, case heard on contest.

4.                  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 as prayed for ? 

DECISION  WITH   REASONS      :

5.                  Both the points are  taken up together for consideration.            We have carefully

gone through the written version filed by the O.P. no. 4 with annexures and also written version filed by O.P. nos. 1 & 3 and noted their contents. O.P. no. 4  in his written version vide 3, 4 has controverted the statement of the complainant that  electric poll is standing on the P.W.D. road but it is rather alleged by the O.P. no. 4 that electric poll was forcibly erected on the land being premises & dag no. 253 which is inherited by o.p. no. 4 and other co-sharers and enjoyed by them peacefully and the complainant has no right to erect any electric poll on their piece of land for electric connection and O.P. no. 4 also filed one petition being no. 190 of 2013 before Executive Magistrate under Section 144 of Cr. P.C. But it is to be mentioned here that no order has yet been passed by the concerned authority against installation of the same in favour of the complainant. O.P. no. 4 has also filed one petition before O.P. nos. 1 to 3 dated 16-02-2013 raising objection for such electric connection in favour of the complainant. And under such circumstances, O.P. nos. 1 to 3 could not complete the further procedure for giving electric connection to the said premises. O.P. no. 4 in his written version vide para 7 has agreed that government has acquired some portion of the land in the middle of the said plot being dag no. 253, for making a public road. And we all know O.P. nos. 1 to 3 being autonomous Government Authority can erect their polls at the convenient places for supplying electricity to different consumers and polls can never be erected at the insistence or instance of any individual, it is public property. Man, as social being, should always extend his heartiest co-operation in executing public duty of the Government Authority. We have compared both the site plans submitted by the complainant and O.P. no. 4.  And moreover, in this modern age is it expected by a man of common sense that some other person would be compelled to live without electricity. O.P. no. 4’s plot of land having dag no. 253, is still a sali land and no conversion certificate has been filed by him. And O.P. nos. 1 to 3 have also stated in their written version vide para 7 that “the said particular pole erected on the roadside of Bargachia Sadatpur Road on the bank of  village drain. And when the said agency tried to the drawal of L.T.O.H. Line and service line for effecting said connection, local people namely, Bablu Majhi ( here O.P. no. 4 ) and others resisted and forced the men to stop the work as a result the job could not be executed and connection could not be effected in favour of the complainant.” Even after that on 14-02-2013, the S.M. Bargachia of O.P. nos. 1 to 3 went to the site with other officials to settle the matter but they had to return without any fruitful result. So, we find it is crystal clear that O.P. nos. 1 to 3 have no latches on their part in this case. And after going through all documents we find it is only O.P. no. 4 who is preventing O.P. nos. 1 to 3 to provide electric connection to the complainant.

      Points under consideration are accordingly decided.

Accordingly, the case is allowed in part  against o.ps.

      Hence,

                                    O     R     D      E      R      E        D

      That the C. C. Case No.  118 of 2013 ( HDF 118 of 2013 )  be  allowed on contest without   costs  against  the O.Ps. 

      That the  O.P. nos. 1 to 3  are directed to provide and draw required service line and supply electricity to the complainant within one month from this order after observing all necessary formalities. The complainant is also directed to give proper way leave to the O.P. nos. 1 to 3 required for work and in the event of being prevented by O.P. no. 4,

complainant is at liberty to apply for police assistance on payment of requisite fees. And O.P. n. 4 is also directed to extend co-operation in this matter, i.d., legal consequence shall follow against him for creating obstruction in government work.

      There shall be no order as to cost

      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.  

      (  Jhumki Saha  )                                                                  

  Member, C.D.R.F.,Howrah.

 ( Jhumki Saha )                         ( P. K. Chatterjee )                (T.K. Bhattacharya  )

 Member,                                     Member,                                President,

 C.D.R.F.,Howrah.                     C.D.R.F.,Howrah.                 C.D.R.F.,Howrah                                      

                                          .