SRIDHAR PUHAN Vs. TAHASILDAR BANKI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Deficiency in banking service and in service of grant of lease of stone quarry is grievance the complainant

(2.) Case of complainant is that on 6.4.1987 lease of Ratagarh quarry was granted for the year 1987-88 by Tahasildar, Banki on 6.4.1987 on a premium of Rs.1,800/-. However, two months after on 11.6.1987, and on 18.7.1987, Revenue Inspector of Ratagarh disturbed the operation of the quarry as a result of which labourers engaged who had been advanced Rs.900/- left the place without operation of the quarry. Although complaints were made to Sub-divisional Officer, Banki, Revenue Officer Cuttack District, Additional Collector, Collector, Chief Minister and Governor, no one heeded the grievance. Complainant stated that he took loan from the bank under the scheme of self-employment of educated unemployed youth and from out of the principal of Rs.33,000/- borrowed, he could have paid the loan with interest and would have earned about Rs.4,00,000/- within four years. However, on account of deficiency in administrative service, he had sustained a loss of about Rs.80,000/- towards principal and interest borrowed with expenses for communication. Accordingly, he has claimed com- pensation of Rs.8,80,000/-.

(3.) On receipt of the complaint on 2.7.1991 complainant was called upon to intimate the names of the person against whom grievance is made. Complainant intimated that grievance is made against the Tahasildar, Banki, Collector, Cuttack, United Bank of India of Bandalo Branch and District Industries Centre, Cuttack. Accordingly notices were sent to them on 2.11.1991. United Bank of India stated its case. Tahasildar and Collector stated their case jointly and District Industries Centre stated its case separately.