(1.) After having heard Mr. P. Jagadeesan, Revision Petitioner who appeared before us in person and Mr. Kameshwar Singh, Counsel who appeared on behalf of the Respondent-Tamil Nadu State Electricity Board, we are clearly of opinion that the State Commission was in error in setting aside the well considered order passed by the District Forum allowing the complaint filed before it by the Revision Petitioner herein and directing the Electricity Board to re-connect the electric supply line to the premises of the Revision Petitioner forthwith besides awarding a reasonable amount as compensation to the Complainant.
(2.) The Revision Petitioner is having a small shop in the premises adjoining the Dindigual-Trichy Road in Dindigul Town. The said shop was admittedly having electricity connection for well over ten years prior to the date of the occurrence of the incident of disconnection referred to in the complaint which was in Sept., 1994. The service line providing electric energy to the Petitioner's shop was disconnected by the staff of the Electricity Board on the ground 'that it was drawn across the road through which a procession of the Chief Minister was to pass and it constituted an obstruction to the free movement of the Chief Minister's convoy. The obvious implication was that the moment the procession had passed, the line would be reconnected because the only ground on which the disconnection had been made was that one of the vehicles in the procession of the Chief Minister would not be able to pass along the road in case the line was allowed to remain in its existing state. Strangely, no steps were taken by the Electricity Board to reconnect the line and restore the electric supply to the Petitioner's shop even after the date of the procession was over. On a representation being made by the Complainant to the Board, he was informed that there was objection from the Highway Authority against the grant of the reconnection. The Complainant therefore, approached the District Forum seeking that a direction should be given against the Board to reconnect the electric supply to the premises and also claimed compensation for the period during which the line had remained disconnected. The District Forum allowed the complaint and directed the Electricity Board to restore forthwith the electricity supply to the Petitioner's premises and also to pay a compensation of Rs. 2,000.00 to the Complainant, in addition to costs of Rs. 500.00.
(3.) On appeal being filed by the Electricity Board before the State Commission, Tamil Nadu at Madras, the State Commission set aside the order of the District Forum merely by stating that since an objection had been raised by the Assistant Engineer, Highways, Dindigul, the District Forum was not right in directing reconnection of the electric supply. In our opinion, the, reasoning of the State Commission is absolutely untenable. As already noticed, the electric supply line to the Petitioner's premises had been in existence for well over ten years prior to the date of disconnection without any objection from any quarter. The disconnection had been made only for meeting the temporary need for enabling the Chief Minister's convoy to pass along the road without any obstruction by the said line and in such a situation, it is obligatory on the part of the Electricity Board to reconnect the said line and restore the supply of electricity to the Complainant immediately after the temporary need for enabling the Chief Minister's convoy to pass was already served. The failure on the part of the Electricity Board to reconnect the electric supply clearly constitutes deficiency in service. If the department of Highways has any objection to the grant of electric supply to the premises, such objection should be raised before the appropriate authority in accordance with law. The order of the State Commission is, therefore, set aside and that passed by the District Forum is restored. The Revision Petition is allowed to the extent indicated above. No costs. Revision Allowed.