Research › Search › Judgment

Calcutta High Court · body

2019 DIGILAW 637 (CAL)

In re: Jahar Lal Mitra v. State of West Bengal

2019-06-06

HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

body2019
JUDGMENT : 1. The petitioner has filed the instant writ petition praying for supply of electricity by installing a meter in his name at premises no.10, Siddheswar Chandra Lane, Kolkata- 700012. The petitioner claims to be a tenant in respect of the property in question. It has been specifically stated in the writ petition that the petitioner was enjoying supply of electricity in his tenanted room from the electricity meter standing in the name of the landlady upon payment of charges to the landlady for consumption of electricity. The landlady failed to make payments of the previous electricity bills. As a result of which, the CESC authorities had disconnected the electric connection at premises no.10, Siddheswar Chandra Lane, Kolkata-700012. Since the petitioner is without electricity, he has applied for new connection through a meter installed at the premises before the electricity authorities. 2. Mr. Dirghangi, learned advocate appears on behalf of the respondent nos. 7 to 9 and submits that the petitioner is not a tenant in respect of the property in question and he is in unlawful occupation of the premises in question. As such the petitioner is not entitled to take supply of electricity in his own name through installation of a meter. 3. A copy of the writ petition has been served upon CESC authorities and Ms. Baisakhi Nag Chowdhury, a representative of CESC Limited is present in Court and has appeared in this matter on behalf of the CESC authorities. She has also submitted an authorisation given by the Company in her favour to appear in the matter. She submits that the men and agents of the CESC Limited went to the premises in question on May 23, 2019 for an inspection to be carried out but were prevented by the respondent nos.7 to 9 from undertaking such inspection. She further submits that the petitioner was enjoying supply of electricity through a meter standing in the name of Ms. Sailaja Nanda Mukherjee and the said meter was disconnected due to non-payment of electricity charges. A sum of Rs. 11,227.67/- is lying as outstanding on account of electricity charges after adjustment of the security deposit in respect of the said disconnected meter. The said authorised representative submits that the electricity supply can only be effected to the petitioner only if the petitioner is agreeable to pay the said outstanding amount of Rs. 11,227.67/-. 4. A sum of Rs. 11,227.67/- is lying as outstanding on account of electricity charges after adjustment of the security deposit in respect of the said disconnected meter. The said authorised representative submits that the electricity supply can only be effected to the petitioner only if the petitioner is agreeable to pay the said outstanding amount of Rs. 11,227.67/-. 4. Learned advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner, upon instruction, submits that his client is agreeable to deposit the said amount without prejudice to his rights and contentions. 5. It is the settled law that the Licensing Company is under an obligation to effect supply of electricity to a person in occupation of a premises. 6. Since the petitioner is admittedly in possession of the premises in question, he is entitled to get supply of the electricity at the premises in respect of which he is in possession. 7. The petitioner shall be at liberty to deposit the said outstanding amount within a period of 10 days from today without prejudice to his rights and contentions. The electricity authority shall issue a notice intimating the petitioner as well as the private respondents, the date of holding inspection with regard to supply of electricity at the premises in question only after being satisfied that the said outstanding amount has been paid. The electricity authorities shall thereafter take all steps to effect supply of electricity to the petitioner at the premises in question within a period of four weeks from the date of holding such inspection and upon compliance of all formalities in this regard by the petitioner. 8. Needless to mention that supply of electricity in favour the petitioner shall not create any equity in favour of the writ petitioner in any proceeding that may be initiated by the landlady against the petitioner herein. 9. In case the men and agents of the CESC Limited are obstructed by the respondent nos. 7 to 9 either at the time of inspection or at the time of installation of the meter at the premises in question, the CESC Limited will be at liberty to approach the officer-in-charge of the local police station for necessary assistance in this regard. If such a request is made by the CESC Limited, the authorities of the local police station shall render all necessary assistance to the CESC Limited. 10. If such a request is made by the CESC Limited, the authorities of the local police station shall render all necessary assistance to the CESC Limited. 10. There is no dispute to the fact that there was already a meter installed at the premises in question in the name of respondent no.7 which has since been disconnected. The meter which is to be installed in the name of the writ petitioner shall be installed at the existing service position as there was already an existing service position where the meter in the name of the respondent no.7 was installed. 11. With the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of. 12. There shall be, however, no orders as to costs. 13. All parties are to act on the basis of the server copy of this order.