DATE OF FILING : 02-06-2011.
DATE OF S/R : 04-07-2011.
DATE OF FINAL ORDER : 06-02-2013.
Faruk Hazra,
son of late Abu Hossain Hazra,
village – Jagadishpur ( Muslimpara ),
P.O. Jagadishpur, P.S. Liluah,
District –Howrah--------------------------------------------------------------- COMPLAINANT.
- Versus -
1. West Bengal State Electricity Distribution Company Limited,
represented by its Chairman,
having its office at Bidyut Bhavan, Saltlake City,
Kolkata – 700091.
2. The Divisional Manager,
West Bengal State Electricity Distribution Company Limited,
Howrah Division – 1,
Howrah – 711101 ( W.B. ).
3. The Station Manager,
Jagadishpur Group Electric Supply WBSEDCL,
Jagadishpur, District – Howrah,
PIN – 711328.-----------------------------------------------------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. The instant case was filed by complainant U/S 12 of the C.P. Act, 1986,
as amended against the O.Ps. alleging deficiency in service U/S 2( 1 )( g ), 2( 1 )( o ) of the C.P. Act, 1986 wherein the complainant has prayed for direction upon the O.Ps. for effecting service connection to provide electric supply together with compensation and litigation costs as the o.ps. in spite of observing the necessary formalities by the complainant has been deferring the supply of electricity without any cause.
2. The brief facts of the case that the complainant applied for providing
electric connection ( domestic ) before the o.ps. on the dated 25-02-2009 against deposition of Rs. 200/- as earnest money followed by quotation dated 13th July, 2009 of Rs. 9,339/- as service connection charges and security deposit money. The said quotational money was not deposited by the complainant within the schedule period. The o.ps. were not given any opportunity to the complainant to deposit the quotational money against quotation dated 13-07-2009 but on the contrary he ( herein complainant ) issued a lawyer's notice on the dated 23-03-2011 stating all the facts in spite of the facts the complainant further deposited service connection charges of Rs. 445/- vide receipt no. 1916 and Rs. 200/- vide receipt no. 1915 dated 07-12-2012 in response to Form No. 1000194973. Having persuasion made by the complainant in several occasions the o.ps. did not take care for effecting the service connection to the complainant premises resulted a serious grievances cropped up against the o.ps. for which he filed the complaint before the Forum for proper justice and relief. Hence the case.
3. The o.ps. on the other hand opined in their written version that they have
no malafide intention / latches to effect the connection and that to they are ready to effect the service connection to the complainant premises but could not be accelerated due to objection raised by the co-sharers and / or other inherited persons
to the portion of the common passage where the service line passes through. Moreover, the o.ps. also stated that the complainant has not made parties to the concerned co-sharers for which the instant case is bad for non-joinder of necessary parties under which the complainant is not entitled to get any relief as sought for.
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. Since the complainant deposited house service connection charges of Rs. 200/- against application form no. 1000366207 together with security deposit of Rs. 445/- with observing necessary technical formalities before the o.ps. i.e. WBSEDCL Authority and o.ps. are willing to effect the service connection, the objection raised by the co-sharers cannot stand for effecting the proposed service connection in accordance with the provision of Section 43 of the Electricity Act, 2003, as an occupier of the property or a part thereof, the petitioner has a statute right to call upon the distribution company to give him electricity and once the requisite application was filed, the distribution company incurred a statutory obligation, to give him electricity, the private parties are not entitled to say that he / she cannot get electricity ( Referring the case study (2010) (3) WBLR (Cal) 539 before the Hon'ble High Court ).
Therefore, we are of the view that the complainant has a genuine demand and in view of the present position of law his demand requires to be fulfilled.
Both the points are accordingly disposed of.
In the result, the complaint succeeds.
Hence,
O R D E R E D
That the C. C. Case No. 44 of 2011 ( HDF 44 of 2011 ) be and the same is allowed on contest against the O.Ps. but without costs
The O.P. no. 3, WBSEDCL Authority be directed to effect the electric service connection to the residence of the complainant as per schedule through common passage in between dag nos. 1237 & 1235 within 30 days from the date of this order giving top most priority.
If there by any resistance by anyone including the co-sharers against such supply of electricity in the said schedule premises, o.p. no. 3, WBSEDCL Authority shall be at liberty to take necessary assistance or protection from Liluah Police Station. The I/C, Liluha P.S. shall be under obligation to provide necessary assistance or protection to the men and officers of the WBSEDCL Authority for providing such supply to the complainant in case of approach made by WBSEDCL Authority .
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.
