Decided on December 13,2010

Karnail Singh Kooka S/O Bhagwan Singh Appellant


- (1.)THIS is an appeal filed by Karnail Singh Kooka (in short, the appellant ) against the order dated 21.1.2010 of the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Ludhiana(in short, the District Forum ), by which the complaint of the appellant was dismissed by the District Forum.
(2.)BRIEF facts of the case are that the appellant is a farmer and having less than 5 acres of agricultural land. It was pleaded that the respondent vide advertisement invited the applications upto 30.3.2007 from marginal farmers, having agricultural land upto 5 acres for the release of the tubewell connection. Later date was extended upto 17.4.2007. Appellant submitted his application alongwith affidavit on the prescribed proforma on 1.4.2007 and the respondent asked the appellant to deposit Rs. 4,000/ -. Appellant deposited the same vide receipt No. D84980/67 dated 18.4.2007 for new AP connection. Respondent again extended the period of C.C. No. 22 of 2007 dated 30.5.2007 under Para V for small and marginal farmers, who do not have any tubewell connection in his name anywhere in the State of Punjab or exist in the waiting list of PSEB under general category or any of the priority categories. 50% of the allotted quota for each zone shall be released under this priority to small and marginal farmers eligible for claiming this priority. Further vide Circular No. 59/07 dated 16.10.2007, the respondent decided to allow the consumer s to submit the affidavit on non -judicial stamp paper that they do not have any other connection in their name. Respondent vide Circular No. 22 of 2007 fixed the target to release the tubewell connection during the period 1.6.2007 to 31.5.2008. The allegation of the appellant was that the respondent till date did not give any response to his application and violated the seniority list while releasing the new connections to those applicants, who applied after the appellant. The act of the respondent was deficiency in service and the complaint was filed with the prayer that the respondent be directed to release the tubewell connection immediately and prayed for Rs. 75,000/ - be awarded as compensation.
(3.)RESPONDENT replied by taking preliminary objection that the complaint was not maintainable and there was no deficiency in service on their part. It was pleaded that the appellant had applied for the tubewell connection on the basis of C.C. No. 22 of 2007, which relates to tubewell policy for the year, 2007 -08 but it was not understood by him that the same relates to the pending test reports. Opening line of the circular says that keeping in view the pending test reports as on 31.3.2007 and test reports likely to be received upto date, both the general category and priority categories as per the data information received from EIC/Chief Engineer/DS. The policy for the release of tubewell connections during the year 2007 -2008 has been considered and decided. In para No. 1 of that circular says that a target has been fixed, which shall cover pending test reports as on 31.3.2007. Sub -para (ii) of the Circular relates to Zone -wise allocations. Sub -para (iii) relates to ban imposed on issue of fresh demand notices w.e.f. 12.4.2002 shall continue except the applications registered upto 31.3.1991 under general category. Sub -para (iv) relates to the release of connection under HVDS. Sub -para (v) says that small and marginal farmers, who were having total land of 5 acres in the State of Punjab and do not have any tubewell connection in their name and is on the waiting list of PSEB shall be allowed the priority but the appellant was not on the waiting list because he had applied for 2 BHP AP connection on 12.4.2007. His application was not registered upto 31.3.1991 for which the circular in question relates, as such, the appellant is not entitled for the tubewell connection on priority at this stage as per the circular in question. On merits, similar stand was taken. Other allegations were denied and dismissal of the complaint was prayed for.
Learned District Forum after hearing the learned counsel for the parties and going through the record, observed that Circular No. 22 of 2007 dated 30.5.2007 and circular dated 16.10.2007 for release of tubewell connection for the year 2007 -08 relates to the pending test reports only, as such, it was held that the appellant was not eligible to get the tubewell connection at this stage.

Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.