State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
Station Manager vs Smt Anita Samanta on 20 February, 2013
State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission West Bengal BHABANI BHAVAN (GROUND FLOOR) 31, BELVEDERE ROAD, ALIPORE KOLKATA 700 027 SC.CASE NO. : FA/314/12 (Arisen out of Order Dated 20/04/2012 in Case No. 09/2011 of District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum Purba Midnapur) DATE OF FILING : 14.06.12 DATE OF FINAL ORDER: 20.02.13 APPELLANTS/COMPLAINANTS : Station Manager, Kolaghat Group Electric Supply, WBSEDCL, P.O. & P.S. Kolaghat, District- Purba Medinipur . RESPONDENTS/O.P.S Smt. Anita Samanta, W/O Shri Ranjit Kr Samanta, Vill. Shantipur, P.O. Mechada, P.S. Kolaghat, District- Purba Medinipur. BEFORE : HONBLE MEMBER : MR. D.BHATTACHARYA HONBLE MEMBER : MR. J.BAG FOR THE PETITIONER/APPELLANT: Mr. Srijan Nayak, Advocate. Mr. Aloke Mukhopadhyay, Ld. Advocate. Mr. Souvik Chatterjee, Advocate. FOR THE RESPONDENT / O.P.S.: Mr. Barun Prasad, Advocate. : O R D E R :
Mr. J.Bag, Ld. Member The present appeal is directed against the Order dated 20.04.2012 passed by the Ld. District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Purba Medinipur, in Consumer Case No. 09 of 2011 whereby the Ld. Forum below allowed the complaint and directed upon the O.P. to effect electric service connection in the premises of the Complainant with Police help, if required, within one month from the date of communication of the order along with further direction to pay a compensation of Rs.1,000/- and cost of Rs.500/- within one month from the date of order .
The complaint case, in brief, was as follows:
The Complainant applied for a domestic electric service connection on 19.09.2003. On 09.02.2004 Rs.835/-(Eight hundred and thirty five)only was deposited as per quotation dated 15.01.2004 issued by O.P./Appellant. But the O.P. did not give the electric service connection. As such, she lodged a complaint case with prayer for compensation to the extent of Rs.40,000/-(Forty thousand) only and litigation cost of Rs.15,000/- .
The complaint was contested by filing written version wherein the O.P. stated inter alia that owing to strong objection raised by one Sri Prafulla Kumar Kapat, service connection could not be effected. Ld. Forum below observed that though the Complainant deposited a sum of Rs.835/- as per quotation issued by the O.P. and though she sent several follow up letters seeking the help of O.P. to get electric service connection to her residence and though the land measuring about 0.01 decimal under Mouza Shantipur, J.L. No. 003, Dag No. 81, Khaitan No. 54/2, over which the electric connection was to be effected by the O.P./Appellant, was possessed by her the service connection was not given.
It has been observed that the exact nature of objection raised by the said Sri Profulla Kumar Kapat has not been spelt out and accordingly the objection was considered to be not tenable, justification behind seeking free way leave from the Complainant being lacking. Ld. Forum below having relied upon section 43(3) of the Electricity Act, held the O.P. liable to pay compensation and cost on account of their lapses in discharging their responsibilities. Accordingly the order as noted above was passed by the Ld. Forum below.
Being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the impugned order the Appellant has come up before this Commission stating inter alia with the pleadings that though attempts were made for effecting new connection on 18.05.2004 and 31.08.2004, such attempts were frustrated by the objection raised by the neighbour of the Complainant, holding also that it was the obligation on the part of the Complainant to arrange for free way leave under the provisions of law but she failed to do so. Accordingly, the order passed by the Ld. Forum below was prayed to be dismissed.
We have gone through the appeal together with the judgment passed by the Ld. Forum below, the petition of complaint, quotation issued by the Station Manager Kolaght Group Electric Supply, letters requesting the Station Manager, Kolaght Group Electric Supply for giving electric connection and the written version filed by the O.P. before the Ld. Forum below.BNA filed by the Appellant has been perused.
Ld. Advocate appearing for the Appellant submitted that one Profulla Kumar Kapat of Shantipur Village is a co-sharer of the disputed Plot No. 103 of Mouza Shantipur under P.S. Kolaghat, who had objected to the extension of electric line over the jointly- owned plot of land which was informed to the Complainant with a request to provide a Free Way Leave for facilitating the extension of the electric line .
Ld. Forum below, as argued by the Appellants Advocate, took a view which is contrary to Regulation 46 of West Bengal Electricity Regulatory Commission, according to which , it is the applicant who shall arrange Free Way Leave for his or her service connection. If there is genuine objection from any corner for extending any service connection, the service provider cannot be charged with negligence on their part. The Consumer himself or herself cannot rest assured that by paying quotation fees he or she would be getting the service inspite of unforeseen factors that may stand in the way. In the present case the objection raised by the co-sharer of the land over which the electric connection is to be extended needs be mitigated by the proposer for service connection. It was also argued by the Ld. Advocate appearing for the Appellant that the officers of the Appellant company made repeated attempts for effecting the new connection but failed only because of the objection of the co-sharer of the plot of land over which the service connection was to be extended.
Ld. Advocate appearing for the Respondent/Complainant submitted that after receiving the necessary charges for providing service connection it was the responsibility of the O.P./Appellant to take necessary action for implementing the service connection.
It is true that the Appellant/O.P received necessary fees/charges for giving a new connection but the service provider cannot be squarely blamed that inspite of all sorts of resistance he is singly liable to take any measure to the liking and in the interest of the proposer of such service.
In the instant case after having gone through the records and upon examination of material facts and evidence we find that there was no deficiency on the part of the Appellant in giving effect to the service connection in the premises of the Complainant /Respondent. In the result, the appeal succeeds.
Hence, Ordered that the appeal be and the same is allowed on contest without, however, any cost. The impugned order is set aside.
MR. J.BAG MR. D.BHATTACHARYA MEMBER MEMBER