Shyam Sundar Paswan v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.23787 of 2013 ====================================================== Shyam Sundar Paswan, son of Late Gajadhar Paswan, resident of MohallaPaharpur, dumra, Khagaul Road, Anisabad, P.S. Gardanibagh, DistrictPatna .... .... Petitioner

Versus

1. The State of Bihar through Secretary, Energy Department, Bihar, Patna

2. Chairman, Bihar State Electricity Board, Patna-cum- Managing Director, Bihar State Power Holding Company Ltd. Biddhut Bhawan, Patna, Bailey Road, Patna

3. Electrical Executive Engineer, Electric Supply Division, Gardanibagh, Patna

4. Sub Divisional Officer, Electric Supply Division, Gardanibagh, Patna ( PESU).

5. Assistant Electrical Engineer ( Revenue), Electric Supply Division, Gardanibagh, Patna ( PESU).

.... .... Respondents ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ashok Kumar Singh, Adv. For the Respondent/s : Mr. Ratan Prasad Sinha , Adv. ===================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 15-01-2016 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Ratan Prasad Sinha, learned counsel, who has appeared on behalf of Respondent nos.2 to 5.

The petitioner has directly approached this Court invoking its writ jurisdiction with a prayer to set aside the Judgment and order dated 05.10.2012 passed by the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Bihar, Patna in First Appeal no.151/2007. By the said order, the Judgment and Order passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Patna in Consumer Complaint No.153/2006 has been approved.

Patna High Court CWJC No.23787 of 2013 (3) dt.15-01-2016 2/2 In this case, leaned counsel for the Respondent nos. 2 to 5 have raised preliminary objection that under the provisions of Consumer Protection Act, 1986, statutory remedy is available to the petitioner. He may file an appeal before the National Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission. This submission was made in presence of learned counsel for the petitioner and learned AC to GP-11.

In view of the fact that for the relief sought for in the present writ petition, there is statutory remedy; the writ petition may not be entertained. If so advised, the petitioner may avail appropriate remedy. The writ petition stands disposed of. It goes without saying that the period consumed in pursuing the present matter i.e. from 28.11.2013 till date may be excluded while considering the limitation matter. (Rakesh Kumar, J) NKS/- U