Gujarat Senior Citizen Federation vs Commissioner

K.A. Puj, J.—The petitioner - Gujarat Senior Citizen Federation has filed this petition through its Executive Secretary - M. Praful K. Desai seeking direction from this Court to the respondent Corporation to make available certified copy of all relevant documents and information which the petitioner has asked in relation to change in policy in connection with gas connection.

This Court has issued notice on 27.7.2004. Thereafter, rule was issued on 16.9.2005 and matter was ordered to be expedited.

It is the case of the petitioner that Baroda Municipal Corporation supplies gas line for natural gas connection for domestic fuel consumption. The petitioner vide his application dated 27.2.2004 requested the Corporation to supply certain documents relating to new policy for gas connection, as per which a new meter is required to be installed by the consumer having gas connection. Since the documents were not supplied reminder was sent on 10.5.2004. The Corporation vide its letter dated 23.6.2004 refused to make available documents relating to new policy and hence the petitioner has filed the present petition.

After the petition was admitted in September, 2005 it appears that the petitioner has not bothered for outcome of this petition. In February, 2010 fresh notice was issued to the petitioner for final hearing, as the petitioner is appearing as party in person. The said notice came back unserved as the petitioner is not residing at the address given in the cause title of the petition. Once the petition is admitted and once it has come up for final hearing it is obligatory on the part of the petitioner to remain in touch with the matter and to remain present. It is not the duty of this Court to issue fresh notice again and again.

Be that as it may, on behalf of the respondent an affidavit-in-reply is filed. On behalf of the respondent it is stated therein that for meters the Corporation had invited bids and the meters of the bidders were sent for testing by Fluid Control Research Institute, Ministry of Heavy Industries at Kerala, which is the only testing organization in the country. There are only two places in the whole India which manufacture such type of meters and out of the said two parties, one of the party''s test report was received and approved. So far as the second party is concerned the test report is approved, but the party is yet to restart the process of selling the meters. There is no compulsion for consumer to take gas supplies from the respondent Corporation. So far as reference is made to the pamphlet relating to the important notice to the gas consumers, it is also available and hence it cannot be said that the same has not been supplied. Even with regard to the Resolution of the General Board the same is attached alongwith the affidavit-in-reply. The Resolution was passed by the Gas Committee of the respondent Corporation dated 7.3.2001. Even the Resolution passed by the General Board of the respondent Corporation dated 16.4.2001 is also placed on record. It was specifically denied that the Corporation has given any monopoly for the supply of meters. Alongwith the affidavit-in-reply even the new policy for grant of gas supply has been formulated. It is also clarified that the issue comes within the policy matter of the respondent Corporation. It is also provided that for those consumers who have chosen to take gas connection and install the meters on their own, meter rent is not recovered. While applying for gas connection no contractual terms existed between the Corporation and the petitioner.

In view of above affidavit-in-reply and also in view of affidavit-in-sur-rejoinder it appears that nothing further is required to be made in the present petition. The petition is accordingly disposed off. Rule is discharged without any order as to costs.