ASHOK KUMAR TRIPATHY vs CHAIRMAN, ORISSA STATE HOUSING BOARD

THIS is an original case filed by the complainant-Secretary of the Toshali Apartment Management Society, Toshali Apartment Block-III, Satyanagar, Bhubaneswar. It is the case of the society that the residents have purchased their respective flats in the block constructed by the Orissa State Housing Board and are in occupation of the same. Their grievance is, though as per the brochure the Board was, to provide various amenities such as exclusive facilities regarding road, parking place, boundary wall, lift, water supply system, sewerage system, etc., the Board have avoided in providing the facilities as promised under the brochure. It is also alleged that some of the infrastructural works and facilities have not been completed. They pointed out these defects in their various letters dated 9.10.1998, 24.12.1998, some time individually and at times jointly to the Board Authorities. The allottees took delivery of possession of the flats because of the assurance made by the functionaries of the Board that all the facilities as stipulated in the brochure would be immediately provided for. But there was total failure on the part of the Board in providing all the facilities. They have categorised these deficiencies in service at page-6 of the complaint petition, these relate to the absence of M.S. gates, compound wall around the Block, absence of pucca drain, absence of blacktopping road to the Blocks from the main road and the paths leading to the garage and the two wheelers parking place, absence of supply of water from the city water supply system, absence of fire safety system, defective toilet and bath room floorings, absence of grading plaster on the top of the roof and so on and so forth.

THE Board filed a detailed counter. In the written version, the Board claimed that there was no deficiency in service in as much as there was no incomplete work left when the allottees took delivery possession of the flats that too without objection. With regard to compound walls while it is their case that the compound wall was first constructed for Blocks 1, 2 and 3 but during the last super cyclone some part of the wall was broken and the work would commence after the release of the funds from the Insurance Company. Some portion of it could not be constructed because of the encroachment by public. They denied the allegation that the Board had promised to provide both ways blacktopping metal roads to the garage and two wheelers parking place. However the main road to each block has been completed in due time. With regard to the allegation of absence of sewerage system the Board stated to have deposited Rs. 7.7 lakhs with the State Public Health Department on 22.6.1999 in order to link the sewerage disposal of the flats to the city disposal system. With regard to fire-fighting system they pleaded that the system was fitted and tested in block No. 3. As regards the defects in lift they stated that the lifts were tested and commissioned after due inspection by the Electrical Inspector, Bhubaneswar and the lifts were handed over to Block No. 3 in good running condition on 13.3.2000. Lifts are operating regularly, Overhead water tanks have been repaired, therefore, question of leakage does not arise.

Heard Mr. B.H. Mohanty the learned Counsel for the complainant and Mr. S.K. Nayak the learned Counsel for the Board.

PERUSED the petition and the counter affidavit. We propose to dispose of the matter in the following manner. There is a general allegation of deficiency in service with regard to the size of the rooms and smallness of the toilets and their sub-standard construction, inadequate sewerage system, defects in materials used. All these allegations relate to individual residents. It is not possible to take up these individual cases in a joint petition. There is no specific allegation of defects in the workmanship of each flat. That apart there is also no documents from the side of the complainant to indicate that the complainants individually pointed out any such defects in their respective flats to the authorities. It is difficult on our part to give any relief to the individual allottees in the absence of any particulars with regard to the defects and any amount spent by each of them towards removing the defects in each of the respective flats. The individual should have come forward with separate complaint petition. Therefore, that part of the prayer for any individual compensation is rejected, in the absence of any material to hold that the Board is found deficient in service towards any individual allottees.

BUT so far as the complaint regarding the common infrastructural facilities to be made available to all the residents of that block is concerned, certainly there are two major items to which the Board have agreed to provide. This is No. 1 with regard to the construction of the compound wall around the blocks. That too by providing iron gates. The Board have admitted that they are obliged to provide this but they are not able to do this in the absence of the availability of funds from the Insurance Company. Therefore, we direct the Board to construct the compound wall completed in all respect which they admit to do. So far as linking the sewerage system of the blocks i.e., Block-3 to the main city sewerage system is concerned, it is their case that they have deposited certain amount with the Public Health Department. This system has to be completed without any further delay. So far as the claim of blacktopping the roads leading to the garage and two wheelers parking place is concerned, it is desirable from the point of view to keep the area clean and decent that the same should be provided. But we do not have any information as to how much money the Board has to spent in the absence of any estimate. We are unable to give a direction in this regard. But we would like to hold that the Board should consider for providing this blacktopping roads from the main road to the garage and two wheelers parking place if included in the Brochure, we give six months time to complete the above two works from the date of communication of the order. No costs. Complaint disposed of.