Learned Advocate for the complainant is present. 

We have heard him at length regarding admission of the complainant. 

We find that the complainant through his complaint has prayed for issuing direction upon the O.P. State Electricity Corporation Ltd. to shift the overhead electric line from the jote land of the complainant and also for payment of Rs.3,48,330/- to the promoter to whom the complainant had entrusted the construction work of his building on his jote land. There is no averment in the complaint that the complainant paid any amount to the O.P for shifting of the over head electric line from his jote land. So, we find that there is no scope /power of this Forum under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 to issue such direction to the O.P. TSECL. 

We further find that the complainant can not be treated as a consumer qua against the O.P. TSECL as per definition given in the C.P. Act, 1986. 

Hence, we are not inclined to entertain the complaint filed by the complainant. The complainant is however, given liberty to approach appropriate legal Forum to seek redress against the O.P. as per law. 

With this observation we have  dropped the complaint.