UTTAM KUMAR KOLEY vs W.B.S.E.B.

THIS is a revisional application directed against the order dated 3.12.2003 passed by the District Forum, Bankura in Proceeding No. 3/03. It may be mentioned here that although it is a revisional application, through oversight the dealing assistant has put a number as if it is an appeal. Therefore, we direct that this clerical error be removed and the proper number of the revisional application be inserted in its place in the cause title.

THE revisional application is in a very short compass. It is against the order dated 3.12.2003 under which the Forum released Shri Pradipta Narayan Roy, the Station Superintendent of Kotalpur Group Electric Supply, W.B.S.E.B. THE facts leading to the passing of such an order are in brief as follows. THE applicant (the complainant before the Forum) lodged the complaint against the disconnection of his electric line by the O.P. for his default in payment of electric bills for the months of June and July, 2003. During pendency of that case, the District Forum passed an order dated 23.9.2003 by which he directed the complainant to deposit half of the amount of the two disputed bills and further directed that on such deposit being made, the O.P.-S.E.B. would restore the connection in the meter of the complainant. Accordingly, the complainant offered to pay that amount i.e., bill for 1500 units, but the O.P. did not accept the same. THEn the complainant sent a Bank Draft for the same amount addressed to the Station Superintendent of that S.E.B., but that also was refused to be taken by the Station Superintendent. At this, the Forum took a strong view and directed the Station Superintendent to personally appear before him in that connection with non-compliance of his order. But again the Station Superintendent was at fault and he did not care to personally appear, whereupon the Court took the extreme measure and issued the warrant of arrest for procuring his appearance. It is then that the Station Superintendent was driven to an action and personally surrendered before the Forum on 3.12.2003 and then the impugned order was passed by the Forum. In this order, the Forum recalled the warrant of arrest which was issued from their Court and also noted that it had heard the learned Advocates of both sides on the matter at length and also the fact that the Forum's attention had been drawn by the learned Advocate of the complainant to its order dated 1.1.2003 and after noting all these, the Forum instead of passing any order then and there on that very date fixed a subsequent date for passing order. This has led the complainant to come before us with his revisional application to the effect that after doing so much over the non-compliance of its order by the O.P. ultimately, it passed no order as to that aspect of the matter. While agreeing with Mr. Nayak that the Forum has reserved its order till the N/D fixed i.e., 16.12.2003 and this revisional application is clearly premature. We cannot shut our eyes to the omission of the Forum to give any impression about the exact question on which it reserved its order. The entire exercise undertaking by the Forum has revealed from its orders, dated 23.9.2003 up to the date on which the impugned order was passed appears to have not made it clear as to why it has remained totally silent on the question of non-compliance of its order by the O.P. In this order dated 23.10.2003, it is observed "I wonder how the Station Superintendent, Kotalpur dared to defy my order dated 23.9.2003." Then in its order dated 5.11.2003 it is recorded with grave concern that Kotalpur Station Superintendent, Mr. P.N. Roy, flatly refused to accept the draft without assigning any reason in its letter dated 8.10.2003 and, further down, that they would take drastic steps against Shri Roy and directed him to appear in person before that Forum positively on 11.11.2003 at 2.00 p.m. Then again in its order dated 11.11.2003 it has given the expression that it is also a matter of regret that non-compliance of their order on the earlier occasion by Shri P.N. Roy was nothing but a whimsical attitude and detrimental to the interest of justice and, therefore, they again directed the restoration of service through the Divisional Engineer, Bankura, who was the higher authority of the W.B.S.E.B. Therefore, although it is true that the revisional application is premature, at the same time it leads us to think how then the violation of the Court's order could be properly given an appropriate dealing. Anyhow, since the matter has been fixed on 16.12.2003 by the Forum for order, it is expected that an appropriate order in this regard will be passed by the District Forum over the issue. For the present, we do not consider it ripe as yet to interfere with any order of the Forum that has so long been passed. So, with this observation, the revisional application be dismissed without being admitted. Revision dismissed.