Order I have heard both sides. 2. The issue which remains after grant of connections to the landlord and the tenants under interim orders, is whether the unpaid electricity charges of the electricity connection given by the J.S.E.B. to the tenants can be realized from the landlord Mr. Bhagwan Mishra, who is the petitioner in W.P.(C) No. 3996 of 2003. 3. The learned counsel for the J.S.E.B. has submitted that because as a pre-condition for grant of power connection to the tenants, an N.O.C. is taken from the landlord also, therefore the landlord is liable and the J.S.E.B. is entitled to recover the unpaid electric dues of the tenants from the landlord. 4. I do not find any good ground for holding that the N.O.C. given by the landlord amounts to the landlord standing surety or guarantee for the unpaid electricity dues of the tenants. In fact it appears that this N.O.C. is taken so that the damage caused to the building, if any, for installing the power connection may not give a ground to the landlord to sue the J.S.E.B. The purpose of the N.O.C. may also be to protect the landlords other rights. 5. In the circumstances, it is directed that the unpaid electric dues of the tenants will not be recovered by the J.S.E.B. from the landlord. However, the same may be recovered from the tenants who had left without paying the dues. 6. W.P.(C) No. 4556/03 has been filed by the person who has occupied the premises as a tenant after the previous defaulter tenant had left. The electricity dues are of the previous tenant and the new tenant, i.e. the petitioner in W.P.(C) No. 4556/03, has applied for a fresh power connection. The J.S.E.B. is demanding that the dues of the previous tenant should be paid off by the new - tenant, as a precondition for grant of fresh connection to the new tenant of the premises. 7. The record does not show that the previous tenants and this new tenant, i.e. the petitioner, are related to each other in any manner or have any community of interest. 8. In absence of such relationship or community of interest, the Board is not entitled to put this precondition that for fresh connection the new tenant should first clear the dues of previous occupant or tenant. 9. In the circumstances, this second writ petition, i.e. W.P.(C). 8. In absence of such relationship or community of interest, the Board is not entitled to put this precondition that for fresh connection the new tenant should first clear the dues of previous occupant or tenant. 9. In the circumstances, this second writ petition, i.e. W.P.(C). No. 4556/03 is disposed of with a direction that power connection sought by the new tenant will not be refused on this ground. 10. Both these writ petitions are accordingly disposed of. 11. The amount deposited under the interim order of this Court may be refunded back to the landlord after adjusting any unpaid dues of the landlord.