G.D. Sharma, J. (Oral) 1. The Divisional Forum, Srinagar (hereinafter to be referred as Forum) on 14-06-2008 accepted the complaint of the respondent and had directed the appellant to reconnect the disconnected water connection of the respondent immediately. The appellant was also required that after reconnection of the water connection, no miscreant or unruly element should be allowed to disconnect the water connection. The appellant was required to refund the water tax to the respondent from the date of the realization of the said tax. In addition to that, compensation of Rs. 50,000/- was granted in favour of the respondent for causing him mental agony and pecuniary loss with interest @ 10% per annum till realization and litigation charges in the sum of Rs. 5000/-. 2. The order was challenged through the medium of this appeal by Mr. M.A. Chashoo, Advocate who filed the appeal on 14-07-2008. Afterwards, the case was listed on 02-09-2008, 18-09-2008, 10-11-2008, 12-02-2009, 15-04-2009 and 09-06-2009, but on no date the advocate of the appellant was present. 3. We have gone through the contents of the impugned order. The brief facts of the case are that the respondent approached the Forum with the allegations that Jr. Engineer, P.H.E. Department, Division Sopore who is also appellant no. 4 in the appeal in collusion with some local hooligans and law breakers disconnected the respondent's water connection to his living house and great inconvenience and hardship was faced by his family members. The matter was taken before the remaining appellants, but they did not redress his grievance. Without any rhyme or reason, the respondent and his family members were made to remain thirsty. It is admitted fact that water is the most essential part of the intake to keep the soul and body together. The respondent had claimed a compensation of Rs. 1.00 lakh from the appellants. Appellant no. 3 appeared in the Forum and resisted the complaint on the plea that he had no hand in the disconnection of water supply connection and in case some mischievous elements had done so, it was the duty of the respondent to lodge complaint in the concerned police station. It was also pleaded that because of paucity of funds, the water supply could not be kept perennial and ultimately scheme was closed. A representation had been submitted to the government, the particulars whereof were given in the written version. It was also pleaded that because of paucity of funds, the water supply could not be kept perennial and ultimately scheme was closed. A representation had been submitted to the government, the particulars whereof were given in the written version. After filing the written version, the appellants did not contest the complaint and on the basis of the exparte evidence led by the respondent, the Forum came to the conclusion that respondent herein had paid the water tax upto ending March, 2007 and upto ending March 2008, for the period when his contention stood disconnected. That water tax for that period should not have been accepted by the appellants. That it had been admitted in written version that during that period, the water supply scheme which was available in that area had been stopped. The receipt of the water tax from the respondent for that period was held as carrying on `unfair trade and practice'. Besides granting the above stated reliefs, the Forum has criticized the working system of the organization of OPs. 4. We have noted above the casual and negligent conduct of the appellants for prosecuting the appeal as after filing it on 14-07-2008 no step was taken to project the view point. Such a lackadaisical approach on the part of the appellant is a tell told story how a bonafide consumer was being made to pay tax in the form of fee for rendering service to have the supply of drinking water which is most essential element to survive on the earth. It is for the echelons on the higher hierarchy to set its house in order. The appellants neither before the Forum nor in the Commission herein have taken any step to prove the pleas which are taken in the written version. It would be of no useful purpose to keep these proceedings. We have gone through the contents of the impugned order as well as scanned the evidence and find no impropriety or illegality in the impugned order so far as the direction is given for reconnection of the water connection in question and refund of the water tax illegally received for the period when the connection stood disconnected for a long time. Compensation in the sum of Rs. Compensation in the sum of Rs. 50,000/- for mental agony, inconvenience and financial loss which the respondent and his family members have suffered has been awarded by way of exemplary reimbursement and keeping in view the conduct of the appellants we do not want to disturb it. However, the interest which has been granted @ 10% per annum is not permissible under law. Hence, we modify the order to the extent that interest @ 10% per annum on the amount of compensation is not payable. The payment of litigation charges at Rs. 5000/- are upheld. Before parting with the record of the appeal, we are of the view that the government after making the payment of the awarded amount to the respondent should hold an enquiry and recover it from the pay/pension of the delinquent officer/officials who have failed to provide the service to the consumer respondent. This would send a right signal to other like minded delinquents who fail to discharge their lawful duties towards the genuine consumers. A copy of the order be sent to the Commissioner/Secretary, PHE Department, Govt. of J&K, Civil Secretariat, Srinagar for perusal and necessary action. Accordingly, the appeal be consigned to the records. There is no order as to costs of the appeal. The record of the Forum be returned at once.