Sarat Kumar Jena v. State Of Odisha

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

W.P.(C) No.8566 of 2021 Sarat Kumar Jena ....

Petitioner -versusState of Odisha and others ....

Opposite Parties CORAM: JUSTICE S. PUJAHARI Order No.

ORDER

27.04.2022 06.

1.

This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.

2.

This writ petition has been filed by the Petitioner seeking a direction to the Opposite Parties to provide new electric connection to his premises, i.e., Plot No.1363/3595 under Khata No.657/712 in Mouza-Cuttack Sahar Unit No.35, Jhanjhirmangala (Purighat) in Cuttack City forthwith and adequate compensation shall be granted to him since 2017. 3.

Heard learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner, Mr. S.C. Dash, learned counsel appearing for the Opposite Party No.2 to 4-Distribution Company and Mr. Sangram Das, learned counsel appearing for the Opposite Party No.5.

// 2 // 4.

Mr. S.C. Dash, learned counsel appearing for the Opposite Parties No.2 to 4-Distribution Company, however, states that an unauthorized connection having been taken by the son of the Petitioner on the aforesaid premises, a penalty of Rs.2,11,817/- was made. Against the same, the Petitioner went to the G.R.F. and the G.R.F. has passed the order to pay the assessed amount. Against which, the Petitioner went to the Ombudsman-I of Electricity, Bhubaneswar where set aside the order. The same has been challenged in W.P.(C) No.18304 of 2018 wherein operation of the order/award passed by the Ombudsman -I of Electricity, Bhubaneswar has been stayed. As such, they are not supplying the electricity to the premises of the Petitioner.

5.

Learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that the Petitioner would pay the assessed amount, notwithstanding the favourable order in his favour by the Ombudsman -I of Electricity, Bhubaneswar.

6.

In such premises, Mr. S.C. Dash, learned counsel appearing for the Opposite Parties No.2 to 4-Distribution

// 3 // Company submits that they have no objection to supply the electricity, if the assessed amount is paid by the Petitioner. 7.

In view of submission of the learned counsel for the parties, nothing survives to be adjudicated in this writ petition. 8.

Accordingly, the writ petition stands disposed of. (S. Pujahari) Judge DA