JUDGMENT Jawahar Lal Gupta, J. (Oral) - The petitioner had applied for the grant of a tubewell connection in the year 1988. On November 25, 1991, a demand notice was issued to him. The petitioner complied with the requirements. He installed the machine as also got the wiring done. A test report duly verified was furnished. His name was placed at No. 23 in the list of the applicants. Ten years have passed. His name remains at No. 23. Nothing has been done by the respondents despite various requests. Hence, this petition. The petitioner prays that a direction be issued to the respondents to release electric connection for the tubewell. 2. A written statement has been filed on behalf of the respondents. It has been averred in paragraph 7 that the "petitioner is at Serial No. 23 in seniority and the connection shall be released on his turn subject to availability of material." 3. Counsel for the parties have been heard. 4. Mr Singla submits that the petitioner has waited for the last 13 years. Due to non-availability of water, he has not been able to cultivate the land properly. 5. On behalf of the respondents, it has been submitted that a strict order of seniority shall be followed. 6. After hearing the counsel for the parties, we find that a number of tubewell connections have been released by the respondent-Authority. It is admitted in paragraphs 13 and 14 of the written statement that the respondent had initiated a cash priority scheme. Under the said scheme, connections had been released. 7. Nothing has been produced on record to show that the persons, who had applied prior to the adoption of the cash priority scheme, were ever informed that they could make a deposit and have their cases considered on priority. 8. Mr Amarjit Singh states that the cash priority scheme was meant for only those cases where one pole was required. In the petitioners case, three poles were needed to provide electric connection to his tubewell. Thus, his case was not covered under the Scheme. 9. Mr Singla states that the petitioner is willing to provide three poles or to pay costs therefor. 10. The working of the respondent-Authority leaves a lot to desire. One can only lament the complete indifference of the Authority in not releasing electric connection for a period of more than 13 years. 9. Mr Singla states that the petitioner is willing to provide three poles or to pay costs therefor. 10. The working of the respondent-Authority leaves a lot to desire. One can only lament the complete indifference of the Authority in not releasing electric connection for a period of more than 13 years. It is the admitted position that in the year 1991, the petitioners name was placed at serial No. 23 in the seniority list. It has remained static at that number for the last one decade. In the meantime, the petitioner and other farmers continue to suffer. On the other hand, the Haryana State Electricity Board, which was originally regulating the work relating to generation, distribution and collection of charges, has now been expanded into a number of Bodies/Nigams. As a result, the expense on wages and amenities etc. has increased four-fold. The burden on the tax payer has increased. However, the facilities have not improved. 11. In the present case, a poor farmer like the petitioner as also many like him have not been given a tubewell connection during the last 13 years. No explanation for this inordinately long delay has been given in the written statement or offered at the time of the hearing of the case. As a result, the petitioner and other farmers have continued to suffer. 12. In view of the above circumstances, we are satisfied that the tubewell connection should be immediately granted to at least those persons whose applications have remained pending for more than ten years. The needful should be done as early as possible. In any case, the electricity connection for the tubewells shall be released on payment of such charges, as may be leviable, to all the applicants whose applications have remained pending for ten years or more. The needful shall be done within six months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 13. The writ petition is allowed in the above terms. No costs. Petition allowed.