Back
DELHI STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES
REDRESSAL COMMISSION, NEW DELHI
Hon’ble Mr. Justice A.P. Chowdhri, President;
Ms. S. Brar & Mr. Desh Bandhu, Members
AMAR JEET SINGH—Complainant
versus
ZONAL ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, DELHI MUNICIPAL
CORPORATION—Opp. Party
Case No. 1741-1995 (DF-II)—Decided on 7.8.1995
Counsel for the Parties :
For the Complainant : In person.
For the Opp. Party : Mr. Seth, Addl. Deputy Commissioner for MCD.
A complaint can be transferred from one Forum to another only if there is an allegation against the conduct of the Presiding Officer or any member which would render him or them unsuitable for dealing with that case.
Headnote:
CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT - TRANSFER OF CASE - SECTION 12 - COURT HELD THAT A COMPLAINT CAN BE TRANSFERRED FROM ONE FORUM TO ANOTHER ONLY IF THERE IS AN ALLEGATION AGAINST THE CONDUCT OF THE PRESIDING OFFICER OR ANY MEMBER WHICH WOULD RENDER HIM OR THEM UNSUITABLE FOR DEALING WITH THAT CASE.
Fact of the Case:
The complainant, Mr. Amarjeet Singh, filed a complaint before the District Forum-II seeking directions to the Zonal Asstt. Commissioner, Delhi Municipal Corporation and other concerned functionaries of the MCD to ensure proper functioning of the surface drainage system of AG-1 Block of Vikaspuri, New Delhi. He also made another application setting out various grievances regarding the functioning of the District Forum-II.
Finding of the Court:
The court held that a complaint can be transferred from one Forum to another only if there is an allegation against the conduct of the Presiding Officer or any member which would render him or them unsuitable for dealing with that case. The court also held that a litigant can have no say regarding the choice of a Judge.
Issues: Whether the complaint should be transferred from D.F.II to D.F.-I.
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the judgment in 1986 SCC (CR) 256 paragraph 74 at page 310, which held that a litigant can have no say regarding the choice of a Judge.
Final Decision: The court rejected the prayer for transfer of the case and directed the parties to appear before the D .F.-II for further proceedings.
Mr. Justice A.P. Chowdhri, President— Mr. Amarjeet Singh filed a complaint before the District Forum-II on 9.6.95 seeking directions to the Zonal Asstt. Commissioner, Delhi Municipal Corporation and other concerned functionaries of the MCD to ensure proper functioning of the surface drainage system of AG-1 Block of Vikaspuri, New Delhi. It was stated that for the last more than two years the drainage system had not been functioning properly resulting in unhygenic condition in the area. Repeated complaints and representations produced no result. The District Forum was requested to direct the officers concerned of MCD to carry out the necessary cleaning/maintenance of the drainage system and submit a regular monthly report to the Forum of the needful having been done for the next six months. Alongwith the complaint was filed a copy of representation made by certain residents of the area to Z AC through one Mr. Rajeev Kumar. Notice of the complaint was issued to ZAC for 26.6.95.
2. On 9.6.95, the complainant Mr. Amar Jeet Singh made another application setting out the following grievances : —
(i) that the District Forum had failed to provide sufficient number of direction boards on the roads leading from Shaheed Jeet Singh Marg to the building where District Forum held its sittings. For a new comer the said building was difficult to locate.
(ii) there was no shop within a reasonable distance of the District Forum building where persons coming to the District Forum could buy stationary items, which are required in connection with complaints etc. made before the Forum;
(iii) the office timings of 11 a.m. to 2 p.m. which had been fixed for hearing of cases, was not prominently displayed resulting in inconvenience to the public going to the District Forum;
(iv) the District Forum failed to make available copies of the Forum’s directions to the general public as to how a complaint could be registered before the Forum;
(v) undue and useless expenditure of public money had been made on large number of fans and expensive chairs, which was wasteful;
(vi) that arrangement for providing cool drinking water at a convenient place within the premises for general public had not been made;
(vii) the premises had a shabby look. The complainant called upon the President to resign his post forthwith after due apologies to the members of the public for causing the aforesaid inconvenience.
3. On 26th June ‘95 another application was made by the complainant to the effect that the justice and fair play was not going to be observed in proceedings of the D.F.-II. It was requested that his case be sent to the State Level Commission immediately.
4. When the case was called for hearing on 26.6.95, Mr. Amar Jeet Singh, complainant repeated his request that his case be sent to the higher authorities as he did not have confidence in the Forum. He was advised to make his request in writing and further proceedings in the complaint were adjourned to 26.7.95. Lateron the aforesaid application dated 26.6.95 was put up before the Forum. By order of the same date, the file has been sent to this Commission for suitable orders. It has been added that D.F.-II has no objection if the case is withdrawn and transferred to the other Forum.
5. On receipt of the record alongwith the above order of the D.F.-II notice was issued to the complainant for today. Mr. Amar Jeet Singh, complainant and Mr. Seth, Addl. Dy. Commissioner of MCD appeared. We have heard the complainant. Mr. Singh submitted that in pursuance of the direction of the President of the D.F.-II, he prepared an application in writing. The President directed a clerk to receive the same and issue acknowledgement under his signature. The clerk refused to comply with the order even though the same was repeated a number of times by the President. That being so, he did not expect that the Forum would be in a position to pass any effective order and to enforce the same. He did not, therefore, expect any justice from the Fo
