Orissa

Cuttak

CC/68/2021

Santosh Kumar Mohanty - Complainant(s)

Versus

Secretary,Energy Department - Opp.Party(s)

L Sharma

19 Aug 2022

ORDER

IN THE COURT OF THE DIST. COINSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,CUTTACK.

                                                            C.C.No.68/2021

                        Santosh Kumar Mahanti,

S/O:Late Nimai Charan Mohanty,

Occupation-Diary Farm,

At:Mallipur,P.O:Kishan Nagar,Via_Soampur,

PIN-754131.                                                                   ... Complainant.

 

                                    Vrs.

  1.       State of Odisha represened through Secretary,

Electrical/Energy Department,

Viz:Grid Corporation of Orissa Limited(GRIDCO),

At:Janpath,Bhoinagar,Bhubaneswar,Odisha-751022.

 

  1.      Orissa Power Transmission Corporation Ltd.,(OPTCL),

At:Janpath,Rd.,Gridco Colony,Industrial Area,

                    Satyanagar,Bhubaneswar,Odisha-751022

 

  1.      Orissa Hydro Power Corporation Limited(OHPC),

Near Bhubaneswar.,

 

  1.      Orissa Power General Corporation Ltd.(OPGC),

Near Bhubaneswar.

 

  1.      The Orissa Electricity Regulatory Commission(OERC),

At Plot No.4,Chunokoli,Sailashree Vihar.

 

  1.      Daven Ku. Panda Junior Engineer,

Electrical Deparatment

 

  1.      Ramakant Mishra(Clerk of electrical dept.)

Both are of (O.P 6 & 7)

At:PO: Kishan Nagar,Via:Soanpur,Dist:Cuttack,Pin-754131.

 

  1.      The President,GRF,Futtack(TPCODL),

2RB-37,CESCO Colony,Badambadi,

P.O:Arundeo Nagar,Dist:Cuttack.... Opp. Parties.

     

Present:           Sri Debasish Nayak,President.

                        Sri Sibananda Mohanty,Member.

 

Date of filing:    07.04.2021

Date of Order:   19.08.2022

 

 

 

For the complainant:          Mr. L.Sharma,Adv. & Associates.

For the O.Ps No.1 to 7:              None.     

For the O.P No.8:        :              Self.            

 

Sri Sibananda Mohanty,Member.

                  The complainant’s case in short is that he is a domestic consumer and his consumer number is 02452839.  He had taken the electricity connection from the O.P No.6, since 2009-2010.  It is averred by the complainant that since January,2012 to March,2014 he was paying electricity dues to the Electricity Department @ Rs.50-60/- per month and from April,2004 to August,2004 he had paid Rs.100/150/- per month as per the bill.  But suddenly for the months of September,2014 to December,2014 , he had received enhanced total bill to the tune of Rs.3046/-.  The complainant raised objection to such high billing before the O.P No.6 and O.P No.6 also assured to revise the bill but he had not revised the bill.  It is stated by him that on 19.1.15, a new meter was installed in his house after repeated approaches made by him.  But surprisingly, after installation of the new meter the amount was further enhanced to Rs.4000-4500/- in total from January,2015 to December,2016.  The complainant again objected to such inflated electricity dues and the O.P No.6 again revised the bill and reduced the amount to the tune of Rs.1667/-.  It is also stated that he was paying the regular electricity bill to the tune of Rs.200/- per month as per his consumption.  The O.P No.6 had raised penal bill without any fault on his part.  It is further averred by the complainant that the O.P No,6 installed the new meter in his house on 19.1.15 but since then he is charging the cost of the meter @ Rs.40/- per month till filing of the case. The cost of the meter would be amounting to Rs.2500/- to 3000/- and the O.P No.6 has extracted more amount towards the cost of meter from him.  It is further stated that he had approached the O.P No.6 to revise the bill but the O.P No.6 misbehaved him and did not rectify the electricity bill.  It is also stated that suddenly on 2.4.21, the O.P No.6 without giving any previous notice and without considering his grievance had disconnected the electricity connection.  Hence, the complainant has filed the case for issuance of direction to the O.P to rectify the electricity bill and to refund extra amount taken from him towards the meter charges  and to pay compensation of Rs.4,00,000/- as well as Rs.1,00,000/- towards cost of litigation.

            The complainant in order to prove his case has filed xerox copy of some documents.  He has also filed evidence on affidavit in support of his case.

2.         The O.P No.8 has filed his written version.  But no other O.Ps have filed their written version.  Hence they were set exparte.

            It is averred by the O.P No.8 that the grievance of the complainant is pending for disposal.

3.         The points for determination are in this case are as follows:

i.          Whether the case of the complainant is maintainable?

            ii.         Whether there was any deficiency in service on the part of O.Ps?

            iii.        Whether the complainant is entitled to the reliefs as claimed by him?

Points no.i & ii & iii.

            The complainant is a consumer of the electricity.  The grievance of the complainant is that the O.P No.6 is charging electricity bill at a higher side.  He is not consuming electricity as charged by O.P No.6.  Inspite of his repeated representations, the O.Ps are not rectifying the electricity bill.  On perusal of case record, it reveals that on 3.4.21 the complainant has approached the O.P No.8, The President, Grievance Redressal Forum,Cuttack for redressal of his grievances.  The said authority has also replied to this Commission and has stated that the grievance petition of the complainant is pending for disposal in consonance with the Electricity Act,2003 and Odisha Electricity Regulatory Commission(Grievance Redressaal Forum and Ombudsman) Regulation,2004, the Grievance Redressal Forum has been constituted.  The Grievance Redressal Forum can decide the grievance of the complainant.  As the complainant had already approached Grievance Redressal Forum, the present case is not maintainable as two proceedings cannot proceed simultaneously.  In view of the above discussions, there is no deficiency of service on the part of the O.Ps and the complainant’s case is not maintainable.  Hence it is so ordered;

                                                            ORDER

            The complaint case is dismissed being not maintainable before this Commission.

Order pronounced in the open court on the 19th day of August,2022 under the seal and signature of this Commission.                      

                                                                                                                            

                                                                                                Sri Sibananda Mohanty

                                                                                                      Member.

                                                                       

                                                                                              Sri Debasish Nayak

                                                                                                    President

 

           

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.