P.T.O. IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No.19352 of 2025 Manoranjita Behera …. Petitioner Mr. A.K. Mishra, Advocate -versus- State of Odisha and Others …. Opposite Parties Mr. P.K. Sahoo, ASC Mr. P.K. Tripathy, Advocate for TPSODL Mr. P.R. Chhatoi, Advocate for Intervenor CORAM: JUSTICE BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY Order No. ORDER 13.05.2026 I.A. No. of 2026 07. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual/Physical) Mode. 2. I.A. filed in Court be registered. 3. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 4. Considering the grounds taken, prayer for amendment stands allowed. Consolidated copy of the Writ Petition with all annexures filed in Court be placed in the appropriate place. 5. I.A. stands disposed of. (Biraja Prasanna Satapathy) Judge 08. W.P.(C) No.19352 of 2025 1. Consolidated copy of the writ petition with all annexures is provided to the learned counsel appearing for the TPSODL in Court. 2. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 3. The present Writ Petition has been filed inter alia with the following prayer:- “In the aforesaid facts and circumstances, it is humbly prayed that this Hon’ble Court may be graciously pleased: (i) direct the Opp. Parties to temporarily close the electricity consumer number 341104220059 which is in TPSODL, Sub Div No.2 ESO Ambapua, Berhampur as earlier as possible. (ii) Pass such other or further orders as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper.” 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that even though the consumer number lies in the name of the petitioner, but on the face of several request being made by the petitioner to dis-connect the power supply, authorities of TPSODL are not acting on the same. 4.1. It is accordingly contended that Opp. Party No.4 be directed to dis-connect the power supply in respect of Consumer No.341104220059. 5. Learned counsel appearing for the TPSODL basing on the instruction contended that in respect of the suit property where the electricity connection has been provided in the name of the petitioner, an order of status-quo has been passed by the learned Senior Civil Judge, Berhampur, Ganjam in I.A. No.101 of 2021 arising out of C.S. No.329 of 2021. 5.1. It is further contended that in the said suit, present petitioner was Defendant No.1/Opp. Party No.1. It is accordingly contended that since an order of status-quo has been passed in the aforesaid suit, Opp. Parties are not in a position to consider the request made by the petitioner to dis-connect the power supply even though the consumer number lies in the name of the petitioner. 6. Learned counsel appearing for the Intervenor- petitioner also contended that with regard to right, title and interest, the suit has been filed and an order of status-quo has been passed in I.A. No.101 of 2021 vide order dated 05.01.2022. 7. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, considering the submission made and since admittedly a suit is pending where an order of status-quo has been passed on contest against the present petitioner in I.A. No.101 of 2021, this Court is not inclined to issue any direction as prayed for. It is open for the petitioner to file appropriate application in the pending suit to get the relief as prayed for. 8. The Writ Petition stands disposed of with the aforesaid liberty. (Biraja Prasanna Satapathy) Judge Basudev