DALIP SINGH Vs. P.S.P.C.L.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision petition has been filed under sec. 21(b) of the Act 1986 in challenge to the Order dtd. 29/1/2013 of the State Commission in appeal no. 913 of 2012 arising out of the Order dtd. 22/5/2012 of the District Commission in complaint no. 02 of 20012.

(2.) We have heard the authorized representative of the legal heirs of the deceased complainant (the petitioner herein) and the learned counsel for the opposite party electricity distribution corporation (the respondents no. 1 & no. 2 herein) and have perused the record including inter alia the Order dtd. 22/5/2012 of the District Commission, the impugned Order dtd. 29/1/2013 of the State Commission and the petition.

(3.) The case of the complainant is that he applied for a tubewell connection under the drip irrigation scheme and deposited Rs.1500.00 as security on 16/12/2008. The corporation ( \ its predecessor board) issued a demand notice on 5/4/2010. The complainant deposited Rs.200.00as electrical inspection fee by challan generated by the corporation on 9/4/2010. He also prepared banker's cheque / draft for Rs.27,000.00 for deposit as service connection charges. He presented the said banker's cheque / draft for Rs.27,000.00 and the electrical test report for the tubewell connection to an official of the corporation on 9/4/2010 but the latter refused to accept the same saying that as per instructions from higher authorities at present service connection charges and test reports are not being received / entertained. He visited the office of the corporation time and again to deposit the service connection charges and test report. His two grandsons also visited the office of the corporation number of times. Ultimately the corporation accepted deposit of the service connection charges of Rs.27,000.00 on 2/6/2011 at which time he was also made to deposit Rs.3500.00 as demand notice renewal fee. He came to know that a third person (Mr. Kheta Singh) deposited the service connection charges and test report on 9/4/2010 and his connection had been released. The complainant was aggrieved that he too had visited the office of the corporation on 9/4/2010 but his service connection charges and test report were not accepted by saying that there were higher orders to the contrary but a similarly placed third person's charges and report were accepted on the same day and a connection was also thereafter released to him. Subsequently the corporation issued another demand notice on 23/11/2011 asking for an additional deposit of Rs.71,437.00 in accordance with the revised rates in this regard. The complainant was further aggrieved that when he was earlier ready and willing to deposit the charges of Rs.27,000.00 on 9/4/2010 itself which was in accordance with the then applicable rates, the rates revised subsequently should not be imposed on him.