JUDGMENT

            Complainant has filed this consumer complaint U/s.35 of C.P. Act, 2019. The brief fact of the complainant is that, the complainant is an inhabitant in village Krushnachandrapur also in the care of Saibaba Sansthan situated in Krushnachandrapur made representation on behalf of that religious institution for granting electricity connection. The complainant’s religious institution is a bonafied consumer and consuming electricity vide consumer A/c No.04758889 paying electric dues regularly. After lunching of TPCODL in place of CESU the concerned authorities of electric department wrongly mentioning in the consumer billing information as “Sri Shirdi Sai Baba Sansthan”, Santara in place of correct recording “Saibaba Sansthan” C/o. Prasanta Kumar Samantaray, Krushnachandrapur without knowledge of the complainant. There is no such organization namely “Sri Shirdi Saibaba Santhan, Santara” is functioning in Santara village moreover the objection raised before the opposite parties has not been redressed till today for rectifying the defects committed by the opposite parties as a result of which the complainant is suffering mentally as well as physically and sustaining injury which cannot be compensated by any means.

            The opposite parties filed their written version stated as under;

            The complainant namely Sri Prasanta Kumar Samataray was a GPS consumer of CESU, PED, Paradeep since 04/2015 bearing consumer No.04758889 for a contract demand of 0.5 KW load under Electrical Sub-Divisiion, Paradeep and Electric Section Bhutamundai. The ownership was changed to Saibaba Sanstan, C/o. Prasant Kumar Samantarya during the month of 08/2015. On 16.10.2020 President, of Sri Shirdi Saibaba Sanstan along with members and the Sarapanch Mangarajpur G.P. had submitted a written complaint against Prasanta Kumar Samantaray.  Their request was to change the ownership and as per field inquiry report of that time the ownership was changed accordingly. Sri Shirdi Saibaba Sanstana is functioning at village Krushnachandrapur (Santara) which is within knowledge of villagers and local administration. Sri Samantaray has never raised any sort of complain before opposite parties and hence the matter of commitment by opposite parties does not arise.  

            The short issue to be decided in this case as revealed from records and submissions and we specifically asked the counsel for the complainant to satisfy as to what relief he sought for and his only grievance is regarding to discrepancy of names in the bills i.e. “Sri Shirdi Sai Baba Sansthan”, Santara in place of correct recording “Saibaba Sansthan”, C/o. Prasanta Kumar Samantaray, Krushnachandrapur in the bill from 2015 to 2020 and subsequently the name was changed from “Saibaba Sansthan”, Krushnachandrapur to “Sri Shirdi Sai Baba Sansthan”, Santara on 23.3.2021. We have gone through the record and found that the name of Krushnachandrapur has been changed to Santara on the same consumer number without giving any notice or opportunity of being heard.

            We therefore direct the opposite parties to correct the bills and issue the new bill in the name of Prasanta Kumar Samantarya of Saibaba Sansthan, Krushnachandrapur. We also impose cost of Rs.2,000/- to be paid by opposite parties No.1 to 6 for mental agony and the opposite parties are free to recover it from the official at fault. We also impose cost of Rs.2,000/- towards cost of litigation.  With the aforesaid observation and direction the consumer complaint is disposed of without any cost.