SUNIL KUMAR KEDIA vs GENERAL MANAGER, M/S. GREATER CALCUTTA GAS SUPPLY CORPORATION LTD.

THIS appeal is directed against order dated 26.6.1998 passed by the C.D.F.I. The case of the complainant/ appellant is that he was a consumer and had been getting gas supply at his residence from M/s. Greater Calcutta Gas Supply Corporation Limited (for short, O.P.). According to the complainant/appellant all payments were duly paid by him except a paltry sum of Rs. 42/- which remained unpaid as meter rent charge for the month of August, 1994. The petitioner paid all the outstanding bills upto 10.6.1994 amounting to Rs. 250/- but, even then the connection was not restored. As per the instruction of the O.P. the appellant/ complainant deposited further sum of Rs. 1,000/- towards reconnection fee by a cheque, but it was returned by the opposite party. Accordingly the complainant/appellant approached the Forum for a direction upon the opposite party to resume gas supply at his premises immediately.

THE case was contested by the opposite party before the Forum. According to the opposite party two meters were installed at the residence of the petitioner : one in the name of his mother, Narmada Debi Kedia and another in his own name. A sum of Rs. 5,041/- remained unpaid in the account of Smt. Kedia and as such the supply was disconnected. It was detected later that the petitioner diverted his line to the line of his mother thereby allowing gas to be consumed by his mother, Narmada Debi. According to opposite party this is impermissible. THE opposite party submits that accordingly the petitioner is not entitled to resumption of gas supply till the outstanding dues of his mother is cleared. DECISION It appears from the report of Sri A.K. Dasgupta, Consulting Engineer that there was a cross-connection between the line of the complainant/appellant and that of Smt. Narmada Debi, his mother through which his mother enjoyed gas supply though her own connection had been disconnected for her failure to clear the outstanding dues. Rule 2 of the Rules and Conditions of the Undertakings for the supply of gas reads as follows : "The Consumer shall not permit the Service Piping Meter or any part thereof, to be altered, removed or interfered with by any person other than an authorised servant of the Undertaking (Penalty Rs. 50 see Clause No. 13)."

It would appear therefrom that a consumer shall not permit the Service Piping Meter or any part thereof, to be altered, removed or interfered with by any person other than an authorised servant of the Undertaking. That there has been interference by the complainant/ Appellant is evident from the report of the Consulting Engineer, Sri A.K. Dasgupta. The supply line of his mother was disconnected long time back for non-payment of outstanding dues. He allowed his line to be used by his mother to get gas supply without the knowledge and consent of the opposite party Rule 13 of the said Rules provides as follows : "Upon any breach of these conditions or in the event of it being found that the Undertaking''s Meter or Meters or Piping or Fittings including appliances have been damaged, removed or tampered with in anyway the Undertaking shall be at liberty either with or without previous notice to the consumer to discontinue the supply of gas and remove the Meter or Meters and Service Piping in connection with their mains, for which purpose their servants and agents shall be allowed access to the premises at all reasonable times. This provision is without prejudice to the Undertaking''s right to enforce payment of the penalties laid down in the Undertakings Special Act (Act V. of 1857)."

THIS rule authorises the opposite party to discontinue supply of gas. Since there was been interference with the supply by the complainant/ appellant, the Forum was perfectly justified in not granting the prayer of the complainant/ appellant. We find no merit in the appeal. Accordingly the appeal is dismissed on contest without cost. Appeal dismissed.