Manash Sarbadhikary v. Cesc Limited And ANR

AD-08 Ct No.09 08.12.2022 TN WPA No. 26796 of 2022 Manash Sarbadhikary Vs.

CESC Limited and another Mr. Bidyut Kr. Halder, Mr. Indranil Halder, Ms. Srabanti Das .... for the petitioner Ms. Sumouli Sarkar .... for the CESC Limited Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that an arbitrary amount has been raised by way of electricity charges bill for the petitioner's consumption, including a period during which the petitioner had not consumed electricity.

Such dispute is contested and controverted by learned counsel appearing for the CESC Limited. The learned Advocate for the CESC Limited further takes a ground of maintainability of the writ petition, in view of the appropriate authority for deciding such a billing dispute, being the concerned Grievance Redressal Officer (GRO).

There is substance in the objection taken by the CESC Limited inasmuch as the law provides that the concerned GRO has to decide issues with regard to

billing disputes. It would not be proper for this court to usurp the jurisdiction of the GRO.

As such, WPA No. 26796 of 2022 is disposed of by granting liberty to the petitioner to approach the concerned GRO for deciding the billing dispute raised by the petitioner in the writ petition.

If so approached, the GRO shall consider the contentions of both parties and give an opportunity of hearing to all concerned. Upon doing so, the GRO shall decide the issue expeditiously in accordance with law, preferably within four weeks from the date of the complaint being made by the petitioner.

There will be no order as to costs.

Urgent Photostat certified copies of this order, if applied for, be made available to the parties upon compliance with the requisite formalities.

(Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya, J.)