Brief fact of this case is that, the complainant Sri Nirakar Patra is a consumer of Electricity since last 40 years having  Consumer No.622112210018.  The complainant has paid all the arrear bills up to 02/2023 supplied by the electrical department. But during next month on dt.06.03.2023 a bill amounting to Rs.3864.00 has supplied for payment by the TPNODL in the name of the father of complainant (Late Angad Patra). The detail bill is as follows-(1)Electric rent of Rs.830.05,(2) Sundry adjustment of Rs.3025.14,(3) Fixed charges of Rs.40.00(4) Water rent of Rs.40.00,(5) Electricity duty of Rs.28.05(6) D.P.S.R of Rs.9.60 in total of Rs.3863.00.The complainant had approached the higher authorities of TPNODL regarding correction of the bill in written but no one was paying attention to the grievances for consideration of the bill for payment. As the complainant is a very poor man is unable to pay such a huge amount of electricity dues for which the complainant approached the Commission to solve the case and direction may be given to SDO,TPNODL for necessary correction of the bill for which the complainant will be able to pay the revised bill and to bring out from  mental agony.

The complainant relies upon the following documents:

1. Photo copies of application to SDO,TPNODL,Joda.
2. Photocopy of the electric bills.
3. Photocopy of Registration Form for one time settlement scheme..
4. Under the above complain the case was admitted and notice issued to Ops. The Op appeared and filed their written version in detail. In their written version the OP stated that the allegation made by the complainant has no basis, without any substance and the same are untenable in the eyes of law for which the complaint is liable to be dismissed. The case is not maintainable in the eyes of law. That the averments made regarding excess bill raised are false and baseless. The true fact is that, due to establishment/fixing of meter in the October,2021, it was presumed that consumer/complainant used higher electricity during the period when the meter was not there, that period was from April,2021 to September,2021 as bill has been generated @99 units per month. So bills have been revised taking average of 6 months bill from October,2021 to March,2022 i.e 200 units per month and accordingly Rs.3025/- has been added in the bill of February,2023 of the complainant. The bill revision amount added is as per laws of the OERC Distribution of condition of Supply Code,2019.That in W.P.(C).No.1704of 2020 between Executive Engineer(Electrical,SOUTHCO Utility,Paralakhemundi Electrical Division and Another, the Hon’ble High Court of Orissa has held in para 5 that-In such view of the matter, the writ petition is allowed. The order dated 17.05.2019 under Annexure-3 including the Execution Proceeding vide E.A.No.7 of 2019 under Annexure-5 issued by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum,Gajapati,Paralakhemundi are quashed.Consequently the order dated 16.09.2019 passed in Misc.Case No.553 of 2019(arising out of F.A.No.190/2019)by the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Orissa, Cuttack is also quashed. The Op.No.1/ complainant is directed to approach the Grievance Redressal Forum as per Section 42(5) of the Electricity Act, 2003. In view of the aforesaid observation by the Hon’ble High Court, the present consumer complaint case should be filed in GRF and not in this commission and hence, it is liable to be dismissed. The OP does not admit any of the allegations made in the complaint petition save that those are expressly admitted hereunder and puts the Complainant to strict proof of the same.Under the above mentioned factual and legal circumstances, the OP prays that the learned Commission may dismiss the case at the threshold and direct the complainant to pay electricity dues raised.

The OP relies upon the following documents:

No enclosures.

On the above pleadings the following issues are framed to decide the case.

1. Whether the case is maintainable?
2. Whether any cause of action arises on this case?
3. Whether Ops have made any deficiency of service?
4. Whether the complainant is entitled to get any relief sought for?

FINDINGS

                All the issues are discussed jointly. The complainant disputes the excess electric bill of Rs.3864.00. On the other hand he complains that he has paid all electric bills till date of filing the case. As per Section 42(5) of Electricity Act-2003 the disputes regarding electric bill should be placed before the GRF. But in this case the present consumer could not file any complaint before the GRF (Grievance Redressal Forum). As per the decision of Hon’ble High Court of Orissa and Supreme Court this Commission lacks jurisdiction to decide the electric bill disputes.The complainant has right to approach the GRF for his electric  bill dispute. So, in the present situation the complaint case is not maintainable and the complainant is not entitled to get any reliefs. There is no cause of action arises in this case.      

ORDER

                      The present complaint case being devoid of merits is dismissed without any cost.