PARITOSH DUTTA Vs. SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER ELECTRICAL CESCO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The complainant alleges that although he had paid all arrear dues in respect of his domestic power supply yet the Cesco authorities by their bills date 10.1.2001 and 9.9.2002 included those arrear amounts in the said bill and demanded a sum of Rs.27,720.18 for payment. Though he moved them with regard to the first bill dated 20.10.2001 stating it to be a wrong one the authorities did not take any steps to rectify the defects rather for non-payment of the dues they disconnected the power supply on 20.11.2002.

(2.) The Cesco authorities in the written version took the stand that in fact the complainant's power supply was not disconnected as alleged on that date, rather he did not pay the amount under the bill but still he enjoys the power supply.

(3.) Heard Mr. P. C. Panda, the learned Counsel for the complainant and Mr. B. K. Nayak, the learned Counsel for the O. Ps. Perused the bills and other materials on record. There is no material from either side to hold whether line was disconnected on 20.11.2002. However, we accept the case of the complainant that power supply has been disconnected on 30.10.2003 as informed by the learned Counsel for the complainant. Thus presently the complainant is going without any electricity.