Krishna Devi v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.11475 of 2023 ====================================================== Krishna Devi W/O Dhurendhar Prasad Singh, Resident of Village- Rahul Nagar,, Brahmpur, P.O.- MIt, P.S.- Brahmpura, District- Muzaffarpur. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar Through the Principal Secretary, Energy Department, Bihar, Patna.

2.

The Managing Director, North Bihar, Power Distribution Company Limited, Muzaffarpur.

3.

The Secretary, Bihar Electricity Regulatory Commission, Vidyut Bhawan-II J.L. Nehru Marg, Bailey Road, Patna.

4.

The Electrical Executive Engineer, Electric Supply Division, (U-11) Muzaffarpur.

5.

The Assistant Electrical Engineer, North Bihar Power Distribution Company Limited, Muzaffarpur.

... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Raju Kumar, Advocate.

For the Respondent/s :

Mr. Kinkar Kumar, SC-9.

For the NBPDCL :

Mr. Kumar Priya Ranjan, Addl. SC.

Mr. Sandeep Kumar, Adv.

Mr. Sudarshan Bharadwaj, Adv.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A. ABHISHEK REDDY ORAL ORDER 22-08-2024 Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Respondent-Corporation has stated that the electricity bill of the petitioner has been revised and the petitioner has already paid the revised bill and nothing remains in the present writ petition to be adjudicated upon.

2. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has not controverted the above statement, however,

Patna High Court CWJC No.11475 of 2023(3) dt.22-08-2024 2/2 stated that the petitioner may be permitted to approach the appropriate forum for the compensation sought for in the present writ petition.

3. Having regard to the above, the present writ petition is disposed of granting liberty to the petitioner to avail the remedies as available to him under law for seeking compensation, if any, against the alleged torture by the respondents.

4. Learned counsel for the Respondent-Authority has stated that the petitioner is not permitting the installation of the smart meter, whenever the officials go to the site, the son of the petitioner is threatening and preventing them from installing the smart-meter. However, this Court is not go into the said aspect, it is for the officials to take whatever steps they want in accordance with law.

5. With the above directions, the present writ petition stands disposed of.

(A. Abhishek Reddy, J) shakir/- U