Orissa High Court
WP(C)/14428/2026 of KALANDI CHARAN BEHERA Vs STATE OF ODISHA on 20 August 2026
of 2 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P. (C) No.14428 of 2026 CNR No.ODHC010315222026 Kalandi Charan Behera …. Petitioner Mr. Debasish Hota, Advocate -versus- State of Odisha and others …. Opp. Parties Mr. Siba Narayan Biswal, ASC CORAM: JUSTICE MRUGANKA SEKHAR SAHOO Order
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
W.P. (C) No.14428 of 2026
CNR No.ODHC010315222026
Kalandi Charan Behera
….
Petitioner
Mr. Debasish Hota, Advocate
-versus-
State of Odisha and others
….
Opp. Parties
Mr. Siba Narayan Biswal, ASC
CORAM:
JUSTICE MRUGANKA SEKHAR SAHOO
Order No.
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER
20.08.2026 (Hybrid Mode)
01.
1. Learned counsel for the petitioner being present in V.C. addresses arguments.
2. The petitioner is a consumer of electricity, the opposite party nos.2 and 3-TPCODL are the supply utility. By filing the writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, inter alia, the following prayer has been made: “ … iii) Issue a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other writ/writs, direction/directions directing the TPCODL to revise/correct the October 2025 bill relating to Consumer No.080027067661; to refund or adjust the excess amount collected in future bills with interest; to dispose of Bill Revision Notification No.5011535971 within a time fixed by this Hon’ble Court; to award compensations/costs for harassment and unnecessary litigation and to Restrain the Opposite Parties from taking any coercive action/disconnection.”
3. Perusal of the prayer made in the writ petition as well as the averments made in the writ petition makes it apparent that the petitioner raises a grievance regarding the electricity bill.
4. On being asked, learned counsel for the petitioner fairly submits that the petitioner has a remedy to approach the statutory ‘Grievance Redressal Forum’ which is a more efficatious remedy in view of the technical aspect of a electricity bill.
5. Accordingly, it is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner shall find his remedy in accordance with law regarding his grievance.
6. The writ petition is disposed of accordingly.
7. It is clarified that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the claim of the petitioner or any of the contentions of the parties.
(Mruganka Sekhar Sahoo) Judge
jyotsna Digitally Signed Signed by: JYOSTNARANI MAJHEE Reason: Authentication Location: OHC Date: 21-Aug-2026 17:09:27 Signature Not Verified