The provisions of Section 109 of the Haryana Municipal Act, 1973 are not mandatory but only directory, leaving a discretion with the Municipal Committee to choose the point for water supply to a house owner.

Mr. Justice S.S. Sandhawalia, President—This appeal is directed against the order of the District Forum, Hisar dated the 18th of September, 1991 whereby the District Forum has declined to enter the merits of the case because of its very complicated and technical nature and relegate the appellant to seek redressal from the Civil Court, if so advised.

2. The appellant-complainant is the owner of a residential house No. 6838 located in Mohalla Dassitab Rai in the town of Rewari where his family has been residing since long. Way back in September, 1977 the appellant applied to the Municipal Committee for providing a water connection to the said house specifically from the 8” C.I. water supply pipe line passing opposite his house. The respondent Municipal Committee declined that request though they were more than willing to release him a water connection from the ordinary 6” pipe line under ground on the opposite side of the road. Aggrieved thereby, the appellant had preferred a regular appeal to the Deputy Commissioner, Narnaul who apparently in a considered order rejected the same. Undettered the appellant then filed another appeal/representation to the State Government which according to him has remained undisposed of so far. Adamant in securing the connection from 8” C.I. pipe line alone, the appellant then preferred the complaint before the District Forum.

3. On notice being issued, the respondent Municipal Committee filed a detailed reply. Therein the firm stand taken was that the 8” C.I. pipe line is a rising pressure one, so as to keep intact the water pressure to supply the same to other areas including those at a slightly higher altitude. Consequently, no individual connections were being released from the said pipe line. However, the respondent came forward to offer the release of a water connection to his house from the 6” pipe line which lies just across the road, as and when it is applied for. By way of replication the complainant filed a detailed reply pointing out the long and contentious history of the case and his persistent demand to have the connection from the 8” C.I. pipe line alone. As already noticed, the District Forum declined to grant relief within its own jurisdiction.

4. The appellant had argued the present appeal in person at length with considerable ability and intricacy. He apparently is an employee of the Public Health Department in the State of Rajasthan and somewhat well-versed with the technicalities of the water supply engineering. He contended that the 8” C.I. pipe was not a rising pipe nor was it a pressure line. We were invited to go into the technicalities of the distinction betwixt the “rising main,” a “pressure line” and an ordinary water supply line etc. Reliance was sought to be placed on the text book on water supply engineering by Shri R.P. Singh and the diagrams and figures therein for the lay about a water-works system and the consequential distribution system etc. On these premises, it was vehemently submitted that the appellant had a vested right to secure the water connection for his house from the 8” C.I. pipe line alone. In the alternative reliance was also placed on Section 109 of the Haryana Municipal Act, 1973 for contending that he had an inflexible right of being supplied water from the nearest main.

5. Though one might complement the applicant on his cruodition in the field of public health water supply distribution the submissions made by him infact boomerang on his case. It is well to recall that he has been precisely denied relief on the ground that the hotly contested matter is one of sizeable complexity and technicality which is hardly fit for determination within the summary jurisdiction of the District Forum. The appellant’s contentions and the submissions only tends to butteress that view. In I (1991) CPJ 78 (NC)‘M/s. Special Machines, Karnal v. Punjab National Bank & Others,’ the National Commission has firmly opined that if it appears to the concerned District F