Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Orissa · body

2015 DAILYLAW 741 (ORI)

PRAVAT DASH v. EXECUTIVE ENGINEERELECT.,BED,CESU

WP(C)/11683/2015 · 2026-04-09

Biraja Prasanna Satapathy

Writ Petition (Civil)body2015

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No.11683 of 2015 Pravat Dash …. Petitioner Mr. J. K. Mohapatra, Adv. -versus- The Executive Engineer (Elect), Bhubaneswar …. Opp. Party Mr. S.C. Dash, Advocate CORAM: JUSTICE BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY Order No ORDER 09.04.2026 05. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual/Physical) Mode. 2. Heard learned counsel for the Parties. 3. The present Writ Petition has been filed inter alia challenging the order dated 01.06.2015 so passed by the Ombudsman-I under Annexure-5. 4. It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner was a consumer under the Opposite Party and after due disconnection of the power supply at the instance of the petitioner, a demand was raised against the petitioner to the tune of Rs.73,525/- till October, 2005. The demand so raised was duly paid by the petitioner. But, subsequently, the Department while providing a new connection to his tenant, the aforesaid demand was again raised in the year 2014 and the tenant on compelling circumstances paid the amount. Because of such payment by his tenant adjusted the same from the house rent to be paid to the petitioner. 5. It is accordingly contended that since the petitioner had cleared the demand of Rs.73,525/- in the year 2005, while providing a new connection to his tenant, the aforesaid amount could not have been demanded and recovered and because of that, petitioner suffered due to adjustment from the rent, as due and admissible by his tenant. 6. Considering the submissions made, this Court is of the view that the dispute is completely civil in nature and this Court is not inclined to entertain the Writ Petition, which has been filed against the impugned order. This Court also does not find any illegality or irregularity with the impugned order and not inclined to interfere with the same and dismiss the Writ Petition. 7. It is open for the petitioner to approach the competent Civil Court for redressal of his grievance. 8. With the aforesaid liberty, the Writ Petition stands dismissed. (Biraja Prasanna Satapathy) Judge Sangita/Utkalika NAYAK Orissa, Cuttack 14:01:35 Signature Not Verified