Delhi

North

CC/252/2024

V K CHATURVEDI - Complainant(s)

Versus

ZONAL COMMISSIONER MUNICIPAL - Opp.Party(s)

08 May 2024

ORDER

District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission-I (North District)

[Govt. of NCT of Delhi]

Ground Floor, Court Annexe -2 Building, Tis Hazari Court Complex, Delhi- 110054

Consumer Complaint No.252/2024

In the matter of

Sh.V.K. Chaturvedi

S/o Shri H.C. Chaturvedi

R/o H. No. 98/H, Railway Colony

Naya Bazar, Chandni Chowk

Delhi-110006

Also at

H.No.256/5, Sector-16, Vasundhara

Ghaziabad, U.P                                           …      Complainant

Versus

Zonal Commissioner Municipal Corporation

Sector-10, Vasundhara

Ghaziabad, UP                                            …      Opposite Party No. 1

 

Property Manager

U. P. Housing Board

Sector-16, Vasundhara                                                            

Ghaziabad, UP                                            …      Opposite Party No. 2

ORDER

08.05.2024

Present: Shri Tejaswi Goel, Ld. Advocate (DLSA-LAC) for Complainant

(Divya Jyoti Jaipuriar)

1. We have heard the arguments by Ld. Advocate Shri Tejaswi Goel, DLSA LAC and also by the Complainant in person on condonation of delay application as well as on admissibility of the complaint. For the reasons given in the application, the condonation of delay application is allowed and the delay in filing this complaint is condoned.
2. On admissibility of the complaint, before considering facts of the case, we had questions about the territorial jurisdiction of this Commission for entertaining this complaint. In the cause title, the Complainant has given two addresses- one of Railway Colony, Naya Bazar, Delhi and another of Vasundhara, Ghaziabad. The Delhi address of the Complainant falls within territorial jurisdiction of this Commission, but the moot question for consideration is that whether the Complainant resides at the said address or not. Upon scrutiny of documents, we noticed that the Complainant has annexed copy of his Voter ID card No. DL/05/060/153509 in support of his address indicating his address as 98/H, Railway Colony, Naya Bazar, Delhi which was issued on 17.05.1995. Although the Voter ID does not have any expiry date, the same is required to be surrendered once the Voter concern shifts from the present address or changes his address.
3. Upon our enquiry, Ld. Advocate for the Complainant, from instructions from his client, confirmed that the said address is of a government accommodation. On our further enquiry, the Complainant has confirmed that after retirement, he has left the said accommodation and the said accommodation was not allotted to any of his immediate family member, but the letters addressed to him and post marked at the said address can be received on his behalf.
4. Section 34 (2) of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 mandates that the District Commission can entertain the complaints if, inter alia, the Complainant resides or works for gain within local limits of the territorial jurisdiction of the concerned District Commission. Although the Complainant has placed on record the copy of his voter ID card, the fact that the Complainant’s local address is a government accommodation, which is not in occupation of the Complainant or his immediate family member, it cannot be said that the Complainant is still residing at the said local address within territorial jurisdiction of this Commission.
5. At this stage, we also made an attempt to search the details of the Complainant in the current voter’s list of the relevant assembly constituency using the Voter ID card details, but the same could not be located. It appears that the name of the Complainant was deleted from the voter’s list, but the Complainant did not surrender his Voter’s ID card to the Competent Authority. The Complainant is still using the said Voter’s ID card despite the fact that he is not residing at the said address and his name is already deleted from the electoral roll of the concerned assembly constituency.
6. We have also noticed that all the communication between the Complainant and the OPs and between Complainant and other government agencies, the address of the Complainant in Sector 16, Vasundhara Ghaziabad is mentioned. The Complainant, in one of the complaints dated 10.03.2022 made to Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Ghaziabad  and Station Officer, Indirapuram Police Station, Ghaziabad (page 17 of the paper book) has clearly mentioned that he is currently residing at 256/5, Sector 16, Vasundhara, Ghaziabad. We have noticed that in letters and documents for the years 2006-07 onwards, which the Complainant has annexed with this complaint, the address of the Complainant is mentioned as 256/5, Sector 16, Vasundhara, Ghaziabad. From the Voter’s ID, it can be understood that as on date, the Complainant is aged more than 80 years of age. He must have been a Government Servant, as he was in occupation of the government accommodation in Railway Colony. Considering that his age in the Voter’s ID card is correct, he must have retired from the government service almost 20 years back. There cannot be any possibility that the Complainant can be in possession of the government accommodation even after 20 years since his retirement.
7. The cause of action for filing this complaint is the disconnection notice (water and sewer disconnection) dated 21.01.2022 issued by OP-1 herein. In the said disconnection notice, the address of the Complainant is indicated as 156/5, Sector 16, Vasundhara, Ghaziabad and no document filed by the Complainant indicates that the Complainant is currently residing at Railway Colony, Delhi address.
8. It is indeed a fact that the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 has expanded the jurisdiction of the District Commissions by permitting the Complainants to approach the District Commission, in whose jurisdiction, the complainant resides or personally works for gain. However unlike clauses (a) and (b) of the section 34 (2), the phrase “at the time of the institution of the complaint” is missing from clauses (c) and (d) of the Section 34 (2) of the CPA, 2019. Not adding the phrase “at the time of the institution of the complaint” in clauses (c) and (d) cannot be termed as an error, and this Commission cannot question the wisdom of the legislature in enacting a particular law. If the phrase “at the time of the institution of the complaint” is not included in clauses (c) and (d) of Section 34 (2) CPA, 2019, these clauses are to be interpreted as to mean “at the relevant time” or “at the time when cause of action arose”. In the case in hand, the relevant time is the time when the OP-1 issued the disconnection notice dated 21.01.2022. There is no document to show that the Complainant was residing at Railway Colony, Delhi address, which falls within the territorial jurisdiction of this Commission, at the relevant time. He has also not pleaded that he is working for gain at any address within territorial jurisdiction of this Commission. Hence, in our opinion, the address of Railway Colony, Delhi is not the current address, where the Complainant was residing at the relevant time of issuance of disconnection notice dated 21.01.2022. Accordingly, the Complainant cannot invoke territorial jurisdiction of this Commission using old address of Railway Colony, Delhi using very old Voter’s ID Card.
9. Hence, for the reasons explained above, we are of the opinion that this Commission does not have territorial jurisdiction to entertain this complaint. As a result, this complaint is dismissed on the ground of lack of territorial jurisdiction of this Commission. Needless to say that we have not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case and the Complainant, if choses to move to any other District Commission of appropriate jurisdiction, his complaint would be decided on its own merits without being influenced by any of the observations made in this order.
10. Office is directed to return all original documents, if filed by the Complainant, to him after keeping the photocopies of the same for the record. Office is also directed to supply a copy of this order to the parties in accordance with rules. Order be also uploaded on confonet website. Thereafter, filed be consigned to record room.

 

 

___________________________

Divya Jyoti Jaipuriar, President

 

 

___________________________

Ashwani Kumar Mehta, Member

 

 

___________________________

Harpreet Kaur Charya, Member