JAIPUR VIDYUT VITRAN NIGAM LTD. vs SHARDA DEVI

THE revision petition is preferred by Jaipur Vidyut Vitran Nigam Ltd., Jaipur from the order dated 3.2.2003 in Appeal No. 2025/1995 of the State Commission, Rajasthan.

THE brief facts of the case are as follows : THE respondent/original complainant Smt. Sharda Devi filed the complaint on 11.11.1992 before the District Forum, Dholpur alleging that the Rajasthan State Electricity Board and its officers had not given her an agricultural electrical connection though she deposited an amount of Rs. 1,950/- on 12.4.1990. On the other hand on 22.2.1992 they sent her a bill for Rs. 4,262/- on a flat rate for alleged consumption of electricity (in Rajasthan agricultural electrical connections are not metered). She complained that a lot of overhead electrical lines were laid over her agricultural land for supply of electricity to people further down. As these jumble of wires could cause damage and injury to her and her people, the complainant''s husband protested against laying of such wires. It was complainant''s case that the Electricity Board got annoyed with the above protest from the complainant objecting to laying electric lines through their property, they raised on her a false bill without ever giving her direct electric connection. The District Forum appointed one Shri Durga Prasad, an Advocate as Local Commissioner who in his report dated 13.7.1993 mentioned that at the time of his inspection on 10.7.1993 there was no sign of any electrical line, meter or board and no sign of electrical connection having been given earlier was seen by him. The Electricity Board took the plea that the electrical connection was in fact given and that the complainant deliberately removed all traces of connections and the equipment to make of false case of non release of electricity connection. The District Forum relied on the version of the Electricity Board official and dismissed the complaint.

In appeal, the Rajasthan State Commission came to the conclusion : "we entertain no doubt that the case put forth by the respondent is a bundle of lies and the documents produced by them are quite false, forged and subsequently prepared only to defeat the genuine prayers of an agricultural lady". It observed that the respondents produced before it certain documents at a very late stage and that held them as not reliable. It reversed the order of the District Forum and ordered refund of Rs. 1,950/- and cost of Rs. 5,000/- with interest at 9%. In coming to this conclusion, the State Commission relied on the report of Mr. Durga Prasad, Advocate and Local Commissioner. It is against this order dated 3.2.2003 of the Rajasthan State Commission that the present revision petition is filed.

THE matter before us, therefore, is on the appreciation of facts. THEre is no legal issue raised for our decision. THE State Commission has passed a well reasoned order after sifting through the evidence carefully. THE order of the State Commission states that it permitted the respondent to explain various facts which cast a doubt on the authenticity of the documents. Yet the respondent simply filed a vague reply. THE State Commission observed that the Local Commissioner''s report was prepared in the presence of both the parties and no objections have been taken by either party to the report. THE Commissioner stated not only there were no cables or electrical fittings or electrical equipment but there were not even signs or marks of having electric supply line to the complainant''s well. At the same time a Commissioner''s report says that only 10 feet away from the complainant''s well, there was an electric pole and three phases of live wire passed just over the roof of complainant''s room and above the well. THEse are the electric lines which were laid over the complainant''s field, to provide electric supply to others further down. The State Commission doubted the version that any L-forms was submitted by the complainant. It entertained serious doubts about the separate service line having been laid on 21.12.1990. It further mentioned that no details like the contractor''s name or address who allegedly signed L-form was furnished by the Electricity Board officials. We would like to mention that in the statement filed before this Commission those details have been furnished. However, it is too late in a date for the revision petitioners to do so. In view of well reasoned order of the State Commission, we would not like to disturb it. The Revision Petition with the above discussion is dismissed and order of the State Commission is confirmed. Revision Petition dismissed.