RAM MEHAR Vs. VICE CHAIRMAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) We are of opinion that this petition has to fail on the short ground that the Complainants cannot be regarded as 'consumers' since there has not been any transaction of hiring of service for consideration as between them and the Delhi Development Authority. Some lands belonging in the Complainants were compulsorily acquired under the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act and they had been paid compensation in full in respect of those compulsory acquisitions. The case of the Complainants is that under a Scheme for providing alternate sites to persons from whom lands were acquired, they are entitled to get alternate sites. Even if that be so we fail to see how the Complainants can be said to be consumers, since the scheme does not operate to create any relation ship in the nature of hiring of service for consideration as between the Complainants and the D. D. A. We have also to observe that none of the relief sought in the petition fall within the scope of Sec.14 of the Consumer Protection Act. On these grounds, the petition has to fail. It is accordingly dismissed. No costs. We make it clear that the dismissal of this petition will not operate to the prejudice of the complainants in the matter of pursuing any other remedy that may be open to them under law. Complaint dismissed.