Storage permission to outside miller resented
Tribune News Service

Ludhiana, November 23
Several local rice millers have resented the permission granted to an outside miller by the administration to store rice in the Food Storage Depot, Ludhiana. They said the outside miller who belonged to Khamano was storing rice here, which was bound to affect the business of local rice millers.

The rice millers in a representation to the Deputy Commissioner, Ludhiana, said Luxmi Overseas Limited, Khamano, had started delivering rice under levy after purchasing paddy from Amritsar, Gurdaspur and Jalandhar. They claimed it was purchasing paddy from Uttar Pradesh also.

They said with storage of rice by Luxmi Overseas Limited in the local depot, no space would be left for them in the next couple of days with the result that their mills would get closed as they would not be able to continue production for want of storing space. With this, they would no be able to fulfill the terms and conditions of contracts entered into by them with various state agencies and the Food Corporation of India, they said.

The millers urged the Deputy Commissioner to stop the Luxmi Overseas Limited from storing rice at the local food storage depot, in the interest of the local millers. The millers also staged a dharna in protest against storage by the Luxmi Overseas Limited.

BSNL penalised for deficiency in services
Our Correspondent

Ludhiana, November 23
The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum has directed Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited (BSNL) to pay Rs 2,000 as compensation and cost of litigation on account of deficiency in services to Ms Veena Gupta, a resident of Kitchlu Nagar.

According to the complaint, Ms. Veena Gupta was sole proprietor of P.Gupta and Company and with phone number 403595, but the billing address for the same was of Kitchlu Nagar. She stated before the forum that she did not receive the bill for the cycle November, 2000 and when she received a telephone message in the end of December, 2000, she collected the duplicate bill and deposited it on January 1, 2001. But inspite of depositing the bill, the telephone of the consumer was disconnected on March 26, 2001 without any prior notice.

The representative of the consumer, Mr S.S. Sarna, pointed out that as per rules of the BSNL, the post office had to send Telephone Revenue Collected daily and because the consumer had deposited the bill on January 1, 2001, the same must have been received by the respondent on the same day or the next day. Moreover despite informing the BSNL officials by the consumer that the bill had been deposited but the receipt had been misplaced, the telephone connection was not restored, he added. After that, the consumer wrote a letter to the respondent on April 4, 2001 after the receipt was traced and the telephone connection was restored after a long period and she had to suffer losses in business. It was alleged that it was clear deficiency in services on the part of BSNL.

The BSNL pleaded that the bill of Rs 1,655 plus Rs 40 as surcharge, was sent to the consumer at the address of Kitchlu Nagar on November 18, 2000 which was to be paid till December 12, 2000 and in case of the payment was made after due date, the payment particulars were to be communicated by the subscriber to TRA office. The respondent stated that the consumer made of the bill on January 1, 2001 but did not show the receipt of the same and as such the telephone was disconnected due to non-payment.

The respondent stated that after receiving the representation of the consumer alongwith receipt of the bill, the telephone connection had been restored on May 14, 2001. The BSNL pointed out that she made the payment after due date and failed to show the receipt as such there was no deficiency in services and complaint was liable to be dismissed.

The forum observed that the payment of the bill was made after the due date and the consumer had informed the BSNL officials about the deposit of the bill on January 1, 2001. The forum stated that it was necessary to take the needful steps to look into the matter by the BSNL as the consumer had informed on telephone about depositing of bill on the said date. Moreover, the Post Office daily sends the TRC to the Nigam and the telephone was disconnected after about two and half months, it added.

The forum stated that the consumer had written a letter on April 4, 2001 and sent the receipt of the bill along with it, but despite that, the telephone connection was restored on May 22, 2001. The forum held that it was clear deficiency in services on the part of the BSNL to restore the telephone connection after two months and 10 days of receiving the necessary proof of deposit of bill and request letter.