KALICHAMY Vs. EX ENGINEER T N E B

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision petition is filed by Mr. Kalichamy against the order dated 17th July, 2000 by the Tamil Nadu State Commission, in Appeal No. 572 of 1999. Brief facts of the case are as follows: certain small farmers from the District of Dindigul applied to the Tamil Nadu State Electricity Board (TNEB) for supply of power in accordance with the scheme formulated under GOM No. 34 of 14. 2. 1995 according to which such connections were to be given on payment of Rs. 10,000 towards the cost of extension of the supply lines. All these small farmers paid Rs. 500 as the first instalment as required under the scheme and expressed their willingness to pay the remaining amount of Rs. 9,500 on demand. They had also agreed to pay for the electricity supplied at the rate of Rs. 250 per year for one horse power. The Tamil Nadu Electricity Board (TNEB) subsequently amended the above scheme by GOM No. 159 dated 6. 11. 1995. According to this revised scheme, the farmers are to be supplied power on payment of Rs. 10,000 only in cases where the actual cost of laying the lines (cost of extension) works out to be less than Rs. 50,000. However, if the cost of extension is estimated to be above Rs. 50,000 then the scheme provides that electric connection would be given only on payment of actual cost of extension. In terms of this revised scheme, these small farmers were asked by TNEB to pay much larger amounts on the ground that the estimated cost of extension in each case works out to be above Rs. 50,000.

(2.) THE complaint filed by 42 small farmers before the District Forum, Dindigul alleging deficiency of service on the part of the TNEB was allowed by the District Forum vide its order dated 21. 12. 1998. The order of the District Forum was however reversed by the Tamil Nadu State Commission in appeal by its common order dated 17. 7. 2000 which held that there was no deficiency in service. It is against the above common order that the present revision petition has been filed. It may be noted that the Revision Petition is filed only by one of these farmers. Mr. Kalichamy whose Original Petition number is 77/1997.

(3.) WE have heard both the parties and perused the record carefully. The facts of the case relating to this particular Revision Petition are as follows : mr. Kalichamy, the petitioner applied for an agricultural connection to TNEB which registered his name under No. 4222 dated 30. 4. 1991. He paid Rs. 500 as required under the Scheme on 29. 4. 1995 and obtained a receipt from the TNEB. His statement that he was willing to pay the remaining Rs. 9,500 on demand as required under the scheme has not been challenged and has to be accepted. The only question that arises is whether Mr. Kalichamy has got a vested right to be given power supply according to the first scheme announced vide GOM No. 34 of 14. 2. 1995 as held by the District Forum or whether he would be covered by the revised scheme under the GOM No. 159 dated 6. 11. 1995 as held by the State Commission.