JUDGMENT By the Court.—Heard counsel for the petitioner and Sri Baleshwar Chaturvedi appearing for the respondents. 2. This petition has been preferred for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to provide electricity connection including pole and wire in respect of Nalkoop for irrigation of agricultural land to the petitioner and a direction to the respondents to decide representation of the petitioner’s father dated 25.9.2009. 3. This matter has been heard on 4.12.2014, when the following order was passed : “As prayed, put up tomorrow i.e. 5.12.2014 to enable the counsel for petitioner to place the notification of November, 2013 to the effect that electricity connection may be given to the consumers even in dark area who have applied prior to publication of the aforesaid notification.”. 4. Sri Baleshwar Chaturvedi, learned counsel appearing for respondent No. 1 to 3 has placed before us a judgment dated 13.8.2014 rendered by the Court in Writ Petition No. 42184 of 2014, Ratan Singh v. State of U.P. and another, wherein chart of sub terrain water level in various development blocks of the State, have been shown. Block Araon in district Firozabad has been shown at serial No. 15 as over exploited area with regard to underground water level. Submission of the counsel for respondent is that no electricity connection for the boring/tubewell is granted as a matter of policy of the Government of U.P. in such over exploited blocks, therefore, petitioner cannot be provided electricity connection as prayed by him. 5. Counsel for the petitioner submits that it is apparent from the G.O. dated 13.10.2014 that there is no such restriction imposed by the State Government upon boring/tubewell which have already been constructed and are only to be energized. 5. Counsel for the petitioner submits that it is apparent from the G.O. dated 13.10.2014 that there is no such restriction imposed by the State Government upon boring/tubewell which have already been constructed and are only to be energized. In this regard, he has placed reliance upon paragraph No. 2 to 4 of the aforesaid G.O, which read thus: 2&mDr v/;;u fjiksVZ es izns'k ds 75 tuinksa ds 820 fodkl [k.Mksa esa Hkwty lalkèkuksa dk vkadyu fd;k x;k gS] ftlds vk/kkj ij Hkkjr ljdkj }kjk mDr leLr fodkl[k.Mksa esa ls 111 fodkl[k.M vfrnksfgr (over-exploited), 68 fodkl[k.M fdzfVdy] 82 fodkl[k.M lsehfdzfVdy rFkk 'ks"k 599 fodkl[k.M lqjf{kr Js.kh esa oxhZd`r fd;s x;s gSA foxr o"kksZ esa fd;s x;s Hkwty lalk/kuks ds vkdyu dh rqyuk esa bu ladVxzLr fodkl[k.Mksa dh la[;k es mYys[kuh; o`f) gqbZ gS] tks ,d fpUrktud fLFkfr gSA 3-&¼v½ 'kklu }kjk le; ij fuXkZr fofHkUu 'kklukns'kksa ds izko/kkuksa ds vuqlkj uohu Hkwty lalk/ku vkadyu] 2011 esa oxhd`r fd;s x;s 111 vfrnksfgr ,oa 68 fdzfVdy [k.Mksa] ;kuh dqy 179 fodkl[k.Mksa tks izns'k ds 44 tuinksa esa vofLFkr gS] es y?kq flapkbZ foHkkx }kjk lapkfyr fofHkUUk ;kstukvksa rFkk fu%'kqYd cksfjax] e/;e xgjh cksfjax] xgjh cksfjax] jktdh; uydwi] lkewfgd uydwi ;kstuk bR;kfn ds vUrxZr fufeZr fd;s tkus okys lHkh izdkj ds uydwiksa ds fuekZ.k ij bl 'kklukns'k dh fuxZe frfFk ls izfrcU/k gksxkA ¼c½ mDr 179 vfrnksfgr ,oa fdzfVdy fodkl[k.Mksa eas d`”kdksa }kjk vius lzksrksa ls bl 'kklukns'k gS fuxZe dh frfFk rd fufeZr fd;s x;s uydwiksa ds mthZdj.k ij izfrcU/k ugha gksxk] fdUrq mDr frfFk ds i'pkr~ fufeZr fd;s tkus okys futh@lkoZtfud uydwiksa dk mthZdj.k ugha fd;k tk;sxkA bl 'kklukns'k ds fuxZr gksus ls iwoZ mDr 179 fodkl[k.Mks esa ls ,sls fodkl[k.Mksa es fofHkUu ;kstukvksa ds vUrXkZr fufeZr fofHkUu izdkj ds uydwiksa ds mthZdj.k ij dksbZ izfrcUèk ugha gksxk tks vfrnksfgr ,oa fdzfVdy Js.kh es ?kksf"kr ugh FksA 4-&mDr Hkwty lalk/ku vkdyu] 2011 ij vk/kkfjr fodkl[k.Mksa ds oxhZdj.k dh lwph ¼vfrnksfgr] fdzfVdy] lsehfdzfVdy½ layXUk dj eq>s ;g dgus dh vis{kk dh xbZ gS fd fofHkUu Js.kh ds oxhd‘r mDRk fodkl [k.Mksa usa izns'k esa ykxw **Hkwty izcU/ku] o”kkZ ty lap;u ,oa Hkwty jpktZ dh lexzuhfr** ds izkfoèkkuksa@j.kuhfr;ksa rFkk vfrnksfgr@fdzfVdy fodkl[k.Mksa es o"kkZ ty lap;u] Hkwty fjpktZ ,oa ty laj{k.k dh dk;Z ;kstuk,W rS;kj fd;s tkus fo"k;d 'kklukns'k la0&672@62&1& 2012&90 th0 MCyw0@2004 Vh0lh0] fnukad 06 twu] 2012 ds vuqlkj lEcfU/kr lesfdr dk;Z & ;kstuk, rS;kj dj fdz;kUo;u dh izHkkoh dk;Zokgh djus dk d"V djsaA d`i;k vius v/khuLFk leLr lEcaf/kr laLFkkvks@laxBuksa dks Hkh mDr lEca/k esa ;Fkksfpr dk;Zokgh fd;s tkus ds funsZ'k nsus dk d"V djsaA mDr dks xEHkhjrk ls fy, tkus dh blfy, vko';drk gS D;ksafd xr Ok"kksZ eas ladVxzLr {ks+=ksa es Hkwty dh fLFkfr esa lq/kkj yk;s tkus gsrq izHkkoh dk;Zokgh u fd;s tkus ls visf{kr ifj.kke izkIr ugha gks lds gSa rFkk fLFkfr fujUrj fcxMrh tk jgh gSA** 6. He then submitted that late Ahibaran Singh, father of the petitioner had applied for electricity connection as per scheme of the State Government in the year 2009 for irrigation of his agricultural fields and had also deposited the required amount of fee for the purpose, pursuant to which the department had prepared line chart and an estimate showing total expenditure of Rs. 77,319/- was prepared. 7. Counsel for the petitioner has emphasized that his father had earlier also taken electricity connection for the purpose of tubewell/boring but that boring was not successful and had failed. Thereafter, the boring was further extended by 40 feet in depth. But the respondents neither provided any pole and wire nor has given electricity connection though the authorities themselves had submitted report in favour of the petitioner. 8. After hearing counsel for the parties and on perusal of the record as well as the report submitted by Junior Engineer appended as Annexure 3 to the writ petition, we find that contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is incorrect and the petitioner has not come before the Court with clean hands. 8. After hearing counsel for the parties and on perusal of the record as well as the report submitted by Junior Engineer appended as Annexure 3 to the writ petition, we find that contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is incorrect and the petitioner has not come before the Court with clean hands. Relevant extract of the aforesaid report reads thus : **fo0fo0[k.M f'kdksgkckn&& fjiksVZ&&fo0fo0 mi[k.M fljlkxat ;g izkdyu :0 77319&00 dk cuk;k x;k gS Jh Jh ,oju flag iq= fujksRrek xzke uokyk vfr;k iksLV iSxw rglhy f'kdksgkckn ftyk& fQjkstcknA us Jheku izcU/k funs'kd egksn; n0 fo0fo0 fu0 fy0 v.kjk ds ;gkW iz0 i= fn;k ftlesa mUgksus crk;k fd mudk futh uydwi dusD'ku dh ,y0Vh0ykBZu ftl 1000 ds ,0 lc LVs'ku ls vftZr gS og vksojyksM gS rFkk mudh ,y0Vh0ykBZu dkQh YkEch gS ftlds dkj.k mUgs cksYVst ugh feyrs gS Jheku vfèk'kklh vfHk;Urk ds vkns'kks dk ikyu djrsa gq;sa ekSds fujh{k.k fd;k rFkk orZeku ;Fkkfpr 100 ds0oh0,0 lcLVs'ku o mlds vkftZr gksus dk fofHkUu futh uydwiksa dh ,Yk0Vh0 ykbZu dk ykbZu pkVZ cuk;k tks fd fjiksVZ ds lkFk layXu fd;k x;k gS orZeku esa xzke uxyk vfr;k es 100 ds oh0,0 :jy VkbZi lcLVs'ku LFkkfir gS ftl ij ls 07 futh uydwi dUksD'ku vfrZr gS ftuds uke dze'k% 1 Jh lqxj flag 2 Jh Hkxoku 3- Jh iaNh yky flag 4- Jh ckWds yky 6- Jh t;n;ky flag 7- Jh ,soju flag gS orZeku esa lHkh futh uydwi dusD'ku /kkjdksa dh 12-05 ,p0ih0 lej lksfoy dh pSd fjiksVZ Hkj nh xbZ gS Jh ,soju flag iq= Jh fujksRRke flag dh ,y0Vh0 ykbZu 07 iksy dh gS orZeku es ftl Ckksfjax ij mudks duS0 fn;k x;k Fkk og QSy py jgh gSA buds }kjk orZeku es iqjkuh Qsy cksfjax es 67 eh0 nqjh ij ubZ 12-5 ,p0ih0 lej lsfoy dh cksfjax dh xbZ vr% miHkksDrk mlh ,soju flag }kjk cksfjax QSy dh otg ls gh fiNys dqN le; ls foHkkxh; fcy Hkh ugh Hkjk gS Jheku izcU/k funs'kd egksn; ds vkns'kks dks ikyu djras gq, Jh f'kojkt flag xzke uxyk vfn;k ds LFkkfior 25 ds0oh0l0 LVs'ku 142 ehVj ,p0Vh0 ykbZu dk 1 u;k 16 ds0oh0,0 lcLVs'ku cukusa dk izLrko bl izkdayu ds ek/;e ls j[kk x;k gSA rFkk 225 eks0 iqjkuh ,y0Vh0 ykbZu dks fMLesaVy djus dk izLrko Hkh mijksDRk izdyu es j[kk x;k gS iqjkus izLFkkfir 100 ds0oh0 ,0 lCk LVs'ku ls 'ks"k 06 futh uydwiksa dh ,Yk0Vh0 ykbZu vftZr gksxhA ** 9. It appears from the above report that petitioner has not taken this plea in the writ petition that he had deepened his earlier existing failed boring/tubewell by 40 feet as argued by him but has got a new boring done at a new site about 67 meters away from the old boring and for this purpose he had requested the department to provide him an extra pole and wire for the proposed connection which was not given to him as per policy and that a perusal of the line chart alongwith Naksha Nazri prepared by the department clearly establishes that there is an old failed boring existing and a new boring about 67 meters away from it. 10. In so far as the G.O. dated 13.10.2014 relied upon by the petitioner is concerned, it does not apply for two reasons, (i) the petitioner’s boring is new one after the G.O. which is situated at a distance of 67 meters from the old boring and (ii) his earlier boring had failed and old boring was not re bored by deepening 40 feet as claimed by him. Therefore, G.O. dated 13.10.2014 does not apply as new boring or failed boring are not covered by it for providing new electric connection. Only new borings which are existing and are to be energized are covered by it. 11. As stated earlier, since the petitioner has not approached the Court with clean hands, this writ petition is dismissed with cost of Rs. 20,000/- which shall be recovered from him as arrears of land revenue. ——————