Sri Joy Prakesh Barnewal vs Md. Surhab Ali And 6 Ors

Citation : 2024 Latest Caselaw 454 Gua
Judgement Date : 29 January, 2024

Gauhati High Court

Sri Joy Prakesh Barnewal vs Md. Surhab Ali And 6 Ors on 29 January, 2024

Author: Michael Zothankhuma

Bench: Michael Zothankhuma

                                                                     Page No.# 1/5

GAHC010265962023




                       THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
  (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

                          Case No. : I.A.(Civil)/132/2024

         SRI JOY PRAKESH BARNEWAL,
         S/O- LATE KESHAB PRASHAD GUPTA, R/O- MOIRABARI, P.S. MOIRABARI,
         DIST.- MORIGAON, ASSAM, PIN- 782126.



         VERSUS

         MD. SURHAB ALI AND 6 ORS
         S/O- LATE TURAB ALI, R/O- VILL- ULUBARI, WARD NO. 8, P.S. MOIRABARI,
         DIST.- MORIGAON, ASSAM, PIN- 782126

         2:THE STATE OF ASSAM

          REP. BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY
          POWER (ELECTRICITY) DEPTT.
          D-BLOCK
          ASSAM SECRETARIAT
          DISPUR
          GHY-06

         3:THE ASSAM POWER DISTRIBUTION COMPANY LIMITED (APDCL)
          REP. BY THE CHAIRMAN
         ASSAM POWER DISTRIBUTION COMPANY LIMITED
          BIJULEE BHAWAN
          GHY-01

         4:THE MANAGING DIRECTOR
         ASSAM POWER DISTRIBUTION COMPANY LIMITED
          BIJULEE BHAWAN
          GHY-01

         5:THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
          MEC
                                                   Page No.# 2/5

             APDCL
             CAR
             MORIGAON
             ASSAM
             PIN- 782105

            6:THE ASSISTANT GENERAL MANAGER
             MORIGAON ELECTRICAL DIVISION
            APDCL
             CAR
             MORIGAON
            ASSAM
             PIN- 782105

            7:THE SUB-DIVISIONAL ENGINEER
             LAHORIGHAT ELECTRICAL SUB-DIVISION
            APDCL (CAR)
             LAHORIGHAT
             DIST.- MORIGAON
            ASSAM
             PIN- 78212

Advocate for the Petitioner   : MR. M A SHEIKH

Advocate for the Respondent : SC, APDCL




             Linked Case : WP(C)/3561/2023

            MD. SURHAB ALI
            S/O- LATE TURAB ALI
            R/O- VILL- ULUBARI
            WARD NO. 8
            P.S. MOIRABARI
            DIST.- MORIGAON
            ASSAM
            PIN- 782126


             VERSUS

            THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 6 ORS
            REP. BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY
            POWER (ELECTRICITY) DEPTT.
                                                     Page No.# 3/5

D-BLOCK
ASSAM SECRETARIAT
DISPUR
GHY-06

2:THE ASSAM POWER DISTRIBUTION COMPANY LIMITED (APDCL)
REP. BY THE CHAIRMAN
ASSAM POWER DISTRIBUTION COMPANY LIMITED
 BIJULEE BHAWAN
 GHY-01
 3:THE MANAGING DIRECTOR
ASSAM POWER DISTRIBUTION COMPANY LIMITED
 BIJULEE BHAWAN
 GHY-01
 4:THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
MEC
APDCL
 CAR
 MORIGAON
ASSAM
 PIN- 782105
 5:THE ASSISTANT GENERAL MANAGER
MORIGAON ELECTRICAL DIVISION
APDCL
 CAR
 MORIGAON
ASSAM
 PIN- 782105
 6:THE SUB-DIVISIONAL ENGINEER
LAHORIGHAT ELECTRICAL SUB-DIVISION
APDCL (CAR)
 LAHORIGHAT
 DIST.- MORIGAON
ASSAM
 PIN- 782127
 7:SRI JOY PRAKESH BERNEWAL
S/O- LATE KESHAB PRASHAD GUPTA
 R/O- MOIRABARI
 P.S. MOIRABARI
 DIST.- MORIGAON
ASSAM
 PIN- 782126
 ------------
Advocate for : MR. U DUTTA
Advocate for : SC
APDCL appearing for THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 6 ORS
                                                                              Page No.# 4/5


                                 BEFORE
               HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MICHAEL ZOTHANKHUMA

                                        ORDER

29.01.2024

1. Mr. M.H. Choudhury, learned counsel for the applicant submits that the order dated 21.06.2023 passed by this Court in WP(C) No.3561/2023 should be modified. He submits that the writ petitioner and the applicant are having a dispute with regard to title over shop Bheti No.195 (ka) at Moirabari Di-weekly Market vide Title Suit No. 245/2021 pending in the Court of learned Munsiff No.2, Morigaon. He submits that as the writ petitioner was in illegal possession over the shop, the applicant made a complaint to the state respondents, which resulted in the respondent authorities cutting of the electricity supply being given to the shop. However, due to the writ petitioner having approached this Court vide WP(C) 356/2023 which has been disposed vide order dated 21.06.2023, the writ petitioner's electricity connection is going to be reinstalled, as he has been given liberty by this Court to approach the respondent authorities to apply for a fresh electricity connection.

2. The applicant's counsel submits that in view of the above facts, the order dated 21.06.2023 passed in WP(C) No. 3561/2023 should be cancelled/modified.

3. Mr. K. Pathak, learned counsel appears for the respondent Nos. 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7 and Mr. B. Kumar, learned counsel appears for the respondent No.1.

4. On perusing the application submitted by the applicant, this Court finds that the present case is basically a challenge to the order dated 21.06.2023 passed by this Court in WP(C) No.3561/2023, which should be done by way of an appeal. Further, the applicant could have filed a review petition if he finds that any ground for review is made out. The issue of title to the shop which is in dispute between the applicant and the writ petitioner is pending before the Court of learned Munsiff No.2, Morigaon and Page No.# 5/5 as such, the said issue will be decided by the said Court. With regard to whether a temporary or permanent connection should be granted to the writ petitioner, it would be profitable to rely on the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Dilip (Dead) through LRs. Vs. Satish and Ors. in Crl. A. No.810/2022, wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that a person cannot be deprived of electricity and that all the electricity supply authorities is to examine, is as to whether the applicant for the electricity connection is in occupation of the premises in question.

5. In that view of the matter, this Court does not find any ground to modify or cancel the order, keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case.

6. The I.A. is accordingly dismissed.

JUDGE Comparing Assistant