JUDGMENT : 1. The new connection effecting the supply of electricity could not be given to the petitioner by the CESC authorities because of the resistance offered by the private respondents. 2. The petitioner applied for new connection and deposited the requisite charges required therefor. Naturally the CESC authorities are under the statutory obligation to effect the supply, provided the conditions laid down in section 43 of the Electricity Act, 2003 are complied with. 3. The private respondents say that the property comprised in thika tenancy and the father of the private respondents was a thika tenant and the petitioner is not residing in the said premises nor in occupation thereof and, therefore, no electricity connection should be given to him. 4. I am not impressed with such submission for the simple reason that section 43 of the said Act provides that electric connection can be given either to the occupier or the owner. 5. The petitioner is also a son of the thika tenant and naturally is a brother of the private respondents. The right of the thika tenant is heritable and not transferable. As an heir and legal representative of a thika tenant the petitioner acquires such right jointly with the private respondents and, therefore, has acquired the status as a owner of the structure made by their father as a thika tenant. 6. Since the electricity connection can also be given to the owner and an application is taken out by the petitioner as one of the co-sharers in this regard, there is no impediment on the part of the licensee company in not providing connection to the petitioner. 7. At this juncture, it is submitted on behalf of the private respondents that the meter is installed in a room, which is in their exclusive possession and occupation and if the meter catering supply of electricity to the petitioner is to be installed, they are agreeable to render all assistance and help to the CESC authorities in shifting the meter-board position from the said room into any common space to be provided by the private respondents. 8. CESC authorities say that they have no difficulty in executing such work provided the expenditure incurred therefor is borne either by the petitioner or the private respondents. 9.
8. CESC authorities say that they have no difficulty in executing such work provided the expenditure incurred therefor is borne either by the petitioner or the private respondents. 9. This Court finds that the proposal given by the private respondents cannot be brushed aside and it will obviate any future disputes or complication, if the entire meter-board position is shifted to a common space. 10. The CESC authorities is thus directed to execute the work shifting the meter-board position to the place provided by the private respondents in the joint property and the expenditure therefor shall be borne by the private respondents. 11. CESC authorities are also directed to install the meter in the name of the petitioner on the basis of an application filed by him and in the event any further obstruction or resistance is offered by the private respondents, they are at liberty to approach the concerned police station and on such approach the Officer-in-Charge of the said police station is directed to render all assistance and help in carrying out the work. 12. The private respondents are directed to identify the common space to the CESC authorities within a week from date. 13. The execution of work shall be completed within four weeks therefrom. 14. It is, however, made clear that the private respondents have undertaken before this Court that they would bear the expenditure for shifting the meter-board position and, therefore, the CESC authorities shall raise a demand of such expenditure, which shall be paid by the private respondents within the time indicated therein. 15. With the above observations, the writ petition is disposed of. 16. There will be no order as to costs.