JUDGMENT : BISWANATH SOMADDER, J. Re: CAN 792 of 2019 Having heard the learned advocates for the parties and upon perusing the application for condonation of delay, it appears that sufficient cause has been shown by the learned advocate for the applicant/appellant in order to explain the delay in filing of the appeal. As such, the delay is condoned. The application for condonation of delay, being CAN 792 of 2019, is accordingly allowed. Re: MAT 1549 of 2018 with CAN 791 of 2019 2. The appeal is treated as on day's list and taken up for consideration along with the application for stay. 3. The instant appeal arises out of a judgment and order dated 9th October, 2018, passed by a learned Single Judge in W. P. 17199 (W) 2018 (Samiran Kabasi vs. West Bengal State Electricity Distribution Company Limited & Ors.). By the impugned judgment and order, the writ petition was disposed of with a direction upon the writ petitioner to pay Rs. 50,000/- as restoration charges within three weeks from the date of the order. After such amount was paid, the Distribution Company was directed to restore the petitioner's industrial connection without any further delay, but positively within 48 hours. The writ petitioner was further directed to pay the balance amount in five monthly instalments. First of such instalment was directed to be paid on 19th November, 2018. Thereafter, the writ petitioner has been directed to go on paying the instalments on 19th day of each month. The learned Single Judge also put in a default clause before disposing of the writ petition. This default clause specifies that if the writ petitioner fails to make payment of any instalment, then the Distribution Company is at liberty to disconnect the writ petitioner's industrial connection without any further notice. 4. The instant appeal has been preferred by the writ petitioner. 5. After considering the submissions made by the learned advocates for the parties and upon perusing the impugned judgment and order, we do not notice any justifiable basis for quantifying the amount of Rs. 50, 000/- by the learned Single Judge as restoration charges. In the facts of the instant case, the appellant/writ petitioner is entitled to reconnection of electricity supply by the Electricity Distribution Company. This is clear from a plain reading of the impugned judgment and order dated 9th October, 2018. 50, 000/- by the learned Single Judge as restoration charges. In the facts of the instant case, the appellant/writ petitioner is entitled to reconnection of electricity supply by the Electricity Distribution Company. This is clear from a plain reading of the impugned judgment and order dated 9th October, 2018. As such, we are of the view that the appellant/writ petitioner may be directed to pay the usual reconnection charges for the purpose of restoration of supply of electricity. Such reconnection charges and any other charges that may be imposed by the Electricity Distribution Company in accordance with its norms shall be paid by the appellant/writ petitioner within a week from the demand so made by the Electricity Distribution Company to the appellant/writ petitioner. 6. So far as the balance amount - as directed by the learned Single Judge - which is required to be paid by the appellant/writ petitioner is concerned, we notice that the learned Single Judge has directed such payment to be made in five monthly instalments. We propose to modify this part of the order by directing the appellant/writ petitioner to pay the exact balance amount - which will be specified in the demand notice to be issued by the Electricity Distribution Company - in twelve equated monthly instalments; first of which, shall be paid within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of the demand notice by the Electricity Distribution Company. 7. In the event of a single default by the appellant/writ petitioner, the Electricity Distribution Company will be at liberty to disconnect the appellant/writ petitioner's industrial connection without any notice. 8. The impugned judgment and order dated 9th October, 2018, stands modified to the extent indicated above. 9. The appeal and the application for stay stand disposed of accordingly. 10. Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be given to the learned advocates for the parties. Arindam Mukherjee, J. : I agree.