(Per Mr.P.N.Kashalkar, Hon’ble Presiding Judicial Member)
(1) This appeal is filed by the original complainant against the order passed by the District Forum, Sangli in Consumer Complaint No. 34/2004 dismissed on 21/05/2004. The complainant had filed consumer complaint against Dy.Director, Land Records, Pune. According to the complainant, he had applied to the opponent officer for getting the land owned by him at Survey No.4/3 measured by the Govt. surveyor and he paid fees. Accordingly, the opponent sent notice informing the complainant that the officials of the opponent are coming for measurement of the land on 14/02/2003. The said notice was received by the complainant on 12/02/2003. As the complainant had to go to Aurangabad, instead of the complainant, his son remained present at the time of land survey. The official of the opponent had visited the field of the complainant on 14/02/20003 and they wrote something and without taking measurements, they went away. On making enquiry with the officials, the complainant was told that for re-measurement/survey of the land, he will have to re-pay prescribed fee. Hence, the complainant filed consumer complaint claiming `1,700/- as mental agony and costs.
(2) The opponents filed written statement and pleaded that at the time of visit to the field of the complainant, complainant was not present and the person who was present, was not having authority of the complainant and therefore they could not carry out land measurement job. Hence, the survey of the land had to the postponed. Unless fresh fee is deposited in the govt. treasury, the land cannot be measured further. They pleaded that they are guilty of deficiency in service. The opponents are discharging function of the govt. Hence, the opponent pleaded that the complainant is not consumer, the complaint should be dismissed. The forum below considering the documents and affidavits filed in the complaint held that the govt. officials are not service provider. The have discharged their duties. The complainant cannot file consumer complaint. As per the complaint, request to the respondent office, the respondent officer had gone to the field of the complainant. Since the complainant was not present and his son was not having authority given by the complainant, the survey of the land had to be postponed and the officials had to go back. Once gone back, for re-measurement the complainant had to pay prescribed fee. As the complainant has not done so, the opponents have not measured the land of the complainant. The forum below, therefore, dismissed the complaint. Aggrieved by this order, the original complainant has preferred appeal.
(3) This appeal was lying unattended from This appeal was placed before us for first order on 02/08/2011. Both the parties were absent, in spite of intimation of date of hearing is displayed on the Notice Board and published on the internet board of the Commission. Hence, it was adjourned to 23/09/2011 i.e. today. Today, both the parties are absent. We are finding that the appeal preferred by the original complaint is devoid of any substance. There is no deficiency in service on the part of the opponent. The opponents had gone to the field of the complainant, but the complainant was not present. The opponents, therefore, could not carry out the survey. If the complainant wanted to re-measure his land, he has to pay fee as per the rules in force. Therefore, we find that the dismissal of the complaint is just and proper and sustainable in law. Hence, the order.
ORDER
(1) Appeal stands dismissed.
(2) No order as to costs.
(3) Inform the parties, accordingly.
Pronounced on 23rd September, 2011.
