Page 1 of 3. IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK WP(C) No. 34746 of 2025 Sashikanta Bhuyan ..... Petitioner Mr. A. Mohanty, Advocate -versus- The Central Odisha Distribution Ltd., BBSR & Anr. ..... Opposite Parties Mr. L.K. Maharana, Advocate CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY ORDER 06.01.2026 Order No. 03 1. This matter is taken up through hybrid mode. 2. Heard Mr. A. Mohanty, learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner and Mr. L.K. Maharana, learned counsel appearing for the Opp. Parties. 3. The present writ petition has been filed inter alia with the following prayer:- <It is, therefore, humbly prayed that this Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to: - (i)Admit the writ petition; (ii) Call for the records, (iii) Issue a writ in the nature of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ/writs, order(s), direction/directions directing the opposite parties particularly opposite party no-2 i.e. Junior Engineer, Electrical, Orikanta, Nischintakoili, Cuttack to consider the Representation of the Petitioner under Annexure-1 and provide him the electrical connection as he has already deposited the required payments for new connection within a time to be stipulated by this Hon'ble Court; Page 2 of 3. (iv) Pass such other order/orders, direction/directions as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper. And for this act of kindness, the petitioner as in duty bound shall ever pray.= 4. It is contended that on the face of the application made by the Petitioner when power connection was not provided, the present writ petition was filed. 5. Basing on the instruction learned counsel appearing for the TPCODL contended that since there is an outstanding lying in the name of the Petitioner9s father to the tune of Rs.45,880/-, new connection cannot be provided unless and until the outstanding is paid by the Petitioner in terms of the Regulation 17(1) of the Odisha Electricity Regulatory Commission (OERC) Distribution (Conditions of Supply) Code, 2019. 6. Considering the instruction so provided, learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner fairly contended that Petitioner is ready and willing to pay a sum of Rs.20,000/- from out of the outstanding lying in the name of his father and the balance outstanding of Rs.25,880/- will be paid by the Petitioners in 12 monthly equal instalments. It is accordingly contended that by accepting a sum of Rs.20,000/-, necessary power connection be provided as applied for and the balance amount be paid by the Petitioner in 12 monthly equal instalments along with his current dues. 7. Learned counsel appearing for the TPCODL has no serious objection to the course of action proposed by the learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner. Page 3 of 3. 8. Having heard learned counsel appearing for the Parties and considering the submission made, this Court while disposing the writ petition, permits the Petitioner to deposit a sum of Rs.20,000/- before opp. Party No. 2 on or before 13th January, 2026. On such deposit of the amount, necessary power connection be provided to the Petitioner subject to fulfilling the other condition as required. Petitioner is permitted to pay the balance outstanding of Rs.25,880/- in 12 monthly equal instalments along with his current dues. 9. The writ petition accordingly stands disposed of with the aforesaid observation and direction. (BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY) Judge Sneha