Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2022 DIGILAW 1946 (RAJ)

Aspak Khan v. Jodhpur Vidhyut Vitran Nigam

2022-07-05

VINIT KUMAR MATHUR

body2022
JUDGMENT 1. The case is listed in the 'Orders' category on the application for preponement of the date, however, with the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the writ petition is being heard and decided finally today itself. 2. The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner who is the resident of Pali and who is in the occupation of the house where the electricity connection is being asked for. The petitioner had applied for an electricity connection for his dwelling house by filing an application to the respondent Nos.1 and 2 but the official respondents denied the electricity connection on the ground that no legal document of his occupying the premises was filed for grant of electricity connection. 3. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is presently in occupation of the dwelling house and has applied for electricity connection by way of filing an application to the respondent Nos. 1 & 2. He submits that since the application was complete in all respect, therefore, the respondent Nos.1, & 2 were under an obligation to provide electricity connection to the petitioner. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon Section 43 of the Electricity Act, 2003 wherein it is stated that if an application is preferred by the owner or occupier of any premises, then the supply company shall give the electricity connection within a period of one month after the receipt of the application. He, therefore, prays that the present writ petition may kindly be allowed and the respondent Nos.1 & 2 may be directed to provide electricity connection to the petitioner. 6. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents oppose the present writ petition and submit that the occupation of the petitioner is in dispute as the proceedings under Section 145 Cr.P.C. is in progress. Learned counsel submit that the petitioner cannot be said to be in legal occupation of the house in question and, therefore, he is not entitled for electricity connection. 7. I have considered the submission made at the Bar and have gone through the relevant record of the case. 8. The fact that present petitioner is in the occupation of the dwelling house for which the electricity connection is sought for, is not disputed. 7. I have considered the submission made at the Bar and have gone through the relevant record of the case. 8. The fact that present petitioner is in the occupation of the dwelling house for which the electricity connection is sought for, is not disputed. It is also not disputed that as per Section 43 of the Electricity Act, 2003, a person, who is owner or occupier of any premises, is entitled to be given the electricity connection on an application being preferred by him in accordance with law. For brevity, Section 43 of the Electricity Act, 2003 is reproduced as under:- "Section 43. (Duty to supply on request): --- (1)1 [Save as otherwise provided in this Act, every distribution] licensee, shall, on an application by the owner or occupier of any premises, give supply of electricity to such premises, within one month after receipt of the application requiring such supply: Provided that where such supply requires extension of distribution mains, or commissioning of new sub- stations, the distribution licensee shall supply the electricity to such premises immediately after such extension or commissioning or within such period as may be specified by the Appropriate Commission: Provided further that in case of a village or hamlet or area wherein no provision for supply of electricity exists, the Appropriate Commission may extend the said period as it may consider necessary for electrification of such village or hamlet or area. 1 [Explanation.- For the purposes of this sub- section, "application" means the application complete in all respects in the appropriate form, as required by the distribution licensee, along with documents showing payment of necessary charges and other compliances.] (2) It shall be the duty of every distribution licensee to provide, if required, electric plant or electric line for giving electric supply to the premises specified in sub- section (1) : Provided that no person shall be entitled to demand, or to continue to receive, from a licensee a supply of electricity for any premises having a separate supply unless he has agreed with the licensee to pay to him such price as determined by the Appropriate Commission. (3) If a distribution licensee fails to supply the electricity within the period specified in sub-section (1), he shall be liable to a penalty which may extend to one thousand rupees for each day of default. 9. (3) If a distribution licensee fails to supply the electricity within the period specified in sub-section (1), he shall be liable to a penalty which may extend to one thousand rupees for each day of default. 9. It is also noted that although the proceedings under Section 145 of Cr.P.C. are in progress, but that itself cannot be a ground for respondent Nos.1 & 2 to deny the electricity connection to the petitioner. 10. In the circumstances, the writ petition is allowed. The respondent Nos.1 & 2 are directed to grant electricity connection to the petitioner within a period of one month from today, if otherwise eligible. 11. It is made clear that the grant of electricity connection to the petitioner will not influence any party to the proceedings under Section 145 Cr.P.C. and the same will not be construed that the electricity connection has been granted to the petitioner being the owner of the property.