Telangana High Court
Smt. Chandrika Vaidya vs The State Of Telangana on 8 August, 2024
Author: Surepalli Nanda
Bench: Surepalli Nanda
HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE SUREPALLI NANDA
WRIT PETITION No.14390 OF 2024
ORDER:
Heard Sri Mohammad Afzal Khan, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, learned Government Pleader for Energy appearing on behalf of the 1st respondent, Sri R.Vinod Reddy, learned standing counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent Nos. 2 to 4 and Smt.V.Uma Devi, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent Nos. 5 and 6.
2. The petitioner approached the Court seeking prayer as under:
".... to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction more in the nature of Mandamus declaring the action of respondents more particularly that of respondent 4 issuing letter vide Lr.No.AE/OP/Bollaram/F./D. No.117/2023-24, dated 29.05.2024 proposing to disconnecting the existing electricity meter connection bearing SC No.AZ132460, USC No.114683714 for house property bearing Municipal No.1-5-1117/1/98&99 (old H.No.5-70/98&99) on plot No.98&99, in survey No.587 to 591, admeasuring 430, Square Yards or 359.48 Sq.Meters, situated at Jonabanda, Alwal Municipality, Ranga Reddy District, covered under registered sale deed bearing document No.2434/1997, under the guise of a 2 SN, J WP_14390_2024 false complaint lodged by some unknown person B.Kamlakar Rao, without considering the explanation submitted by me on 03.05.2024 to respondents 3 & 4 and without following the due process of law as being illegal, Arbitrary unconstitutional, being violative of Article 21 and 300A, against the Letter and spirit of Catena of judgments rendered by this Hon'ble Court as well that of Honorable Supreme Court of India apart from being violative of principles of natural justice ...."
3. The case of the petitioner as per the averments made by the petitioner in the affidavit filed by the petitioner in support of the present Writ Petition is as under:-
a) The specific case of the petitioner that petitioner is the absolute owner, possessor and enjoyer of all that residential house property bearing Municipal No.1-5-1117/1/98&99 (Old H.No.5-70/98&99) on plot No.98 & 99, in survey No.587 to 591, admeasuring 430, Square Yards or 359.48 Sq.Meters, situated at Jonabanda, Alwal Municipality, Ranga Reddy District, covered under registered sale deed bearing No. 2434/1997, dated 05.08.1997 on the file of SRO Vallabh Nagar.3
SN, J WP_14390_2024
b) The respondent No.4 issued letter vide Lr.No.AE/OP/Bollaram/F./D.No.117/2023-24, dated 29.05.2024 proposing to disconnect the existing electricity meter connection bearing SC No.AZ132460, USC No.114683714 for house property bearing Municipal No.1-5- 1117/1/98&99 (Old H.No.5-70/98&99) on plot No.98 & 99, in survey No.587 to 591, admeasuring 430, Square Yards or 359.48 Sq.Meters, situated at Jonabanda, Alwal Municipality, Ranga Reddy District, covered under registered sale deed bearing No. 2434/1997 under the guise of a false compliant lodged by respondent No.6, the respondent Nos. 3 and 4 without considering the explanation submitted by the petitioner on 03.05.2024 and without following the due process of law as being illegal, arbitrary un constitutional, being violative of Articles 21 and 300A against the letter and spirit of catena of judgments rendered by this Hon'ble Court as well Hon'ble Supreme Court of India. Hence, the present Writ Petition.
4. It is specific case of the petitioner that the 4th respondent issued impugned letter, dated 29.05.2024 4 SN, J WP_14390_2024 proposing to disconnect the existing electricity meter connection bearing SC No.AZ132460, USC No.114683714 for house property bearing Municipal No.1-5-1117/1/98&99 (Old H.No.5-70/98&99) on plot No.98 & 99, in survey No.587 to 591, admeasuring 430, Square Yards or 359.48 Sq.Meters, situated at Jonabanda, Alwal Municipality, Ranga Reddy District, covered under registered sale deed bearing No. 2434/1997 without considering the explanation submitted by the petitioner on 03.05.2024 to the respondent Nos. 3 and 4 and without following the due procedure.
5. This Court passed interim orders dated 10.06.2024 observing as under:-
The respondent Nos.3 and 4 are directed not to disconnect the electricity supply for meter with SC No.AZ132460 with USC No.114683714 of house property bearing Municipal No.1-5-1117/1/98 &99 (Old H.No.5-70/98 & 99) on plot No.98 & 99, in survey No.587 to 591, admeasuring 430 Square Yards or 359.48 Square Meters, situated at Jonabanda, Alwal Municipality, Ranga Reddy District till 14.06.2024.5
SN, J WP_14390_2024 Accordingly, this petition is ordered.
6. Learned standing counsel Sri R.Vinod Reddy submits that the writ petition could be disposed of directing the respondent Nos. 3 and 4 to consider the explanation of the petitioner dated 03.05.2024 by providing an opportunity of personal hearing to both the petitioner and also the 5th respondent who is representing the complainant i.e., the 6th respondent herein and pass appropriate orders within a reasonable period.
PERUSED THE RECORD:-
7. Section 43 of the Electricity Act, 2003 reads as under:
"Section 43. (Duty to supply on request) (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 6 SN, J WP_14390_2024 extension or commissioning or within such period as may be specified by the Appropriate Commission: 1 Subs. by Act 26 of 2007, Sec.8 for the words "Every distribution"
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."
8. The Apex Court in the Judgment reported in 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 453 in between K.C.Ninan Vs. Kerala State of Electricity Board and others passed in Civil 7 SN, J WP_14390_2024 Appeal Nos.2109 and 2110 of 2004, dated 19.05.2023, observed as under:
"The duty to supply electricity under Section 43 is with respect to the owner or occupier of the premises. The 2003 Act contemplates a synergy between the consumer and premises. Under Section 43, when electricity is supplied, the owner or occupier becomes a consumer only with respect to those particular premises for which electricity is sought and provided by the Electric Utilities."
9. The Apex Court in its Judgment reported in (2011) 12 Supreme Court Cases 314 in between Chandu Khamaru Vs. Nayan Malik and Others passed in Civil Appeal No.7572 of 2011 dated 02.09.2011 observed as under:
Sub-section (1) of Section 42 and sub-section (1) of Section 43 of the Electricity Act, 2003 are quoted herein below:
"42. Duties of distribution licensees and open access-(1) It shall be the duty of a distribution licensee to develop and maintain an efficient co-ordinated and economical distribution system in his area of supply and to supply electricity in accordance with the provisions contained in this Act."
"43. Duty to supply on request-(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."
7. It will be clear from sub-section (1) of Section 42 that every distribution licensee has a duty to develop and maintain an efficient co-ordinated and economical distribution system in his area of supply and to supply electricity in accordance with the provisions contained in this Act. Sub-section (1) of Section 8 SN, J WP_14390_2024 43 provides that 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. These provisions in the Electricity Act, 2003 make it amply clear that a distribution licensee has a statutory duty to supply electricity to an owner or occupier of any premises located in the area of supply of electricity of the distribution licensee, if such owner or occupier of the premises applies for it, and correspondingly every owner or occupier of any premises has a statutory right to apply for and obtain such electric supply from the distribution licensee.
10. ...The case of the appellant, on the other hand, is that this passage is not a private passage of respondent Nos.1 to 3 but is a common passage and therefore an electric line can be drawn through this common passage. This dispute will have to be resolved in Civil Suit No.83 of 2004 pending in the Court of Civil Judge (Junior Division), Howrah, or in any other suit, but pending resolution of this dispute between the parties, the appellant cannot be denied supply of electricity to his house.
11. We, therefore, set aside the order of the learned Single Judge as well as the impugned order of the Division Bench and dispose of the Writ Petition of respondent nos.1 to 3 with the direction that the distribution licensee will find out whether there is any other way in which electric line can be drawn for supply of electricity to the house of the appellant, other than the disputed passage in Dag Nos.406, 407 and 409. If there is no other way to supply electricity to the house of the appellant, the distribution licensee will follow the provisions of sub-section (2) of Section 67 of the Electricity Act, 2003 for carrying out the work for supply of electricity to the house of the appellant.
10. The Apex Court in the Judgment reported in 2022 LiveLaw 570 in between Dilip (dead) through LRs Vs. Satish and others passed in CRLA No.810 of 2022 9 SN, J WP_14390_2024 (arising out of Special Leave petition (CRL)No.8917 of 2019), dated 13.05.2022 observed as under:
"It is not disputed that applicant No.1 has obtained the connection of electricity. The submissions made show that applicant No. 1 is in possession of the shop and he is running a saloon shop. It is clear that he needs electricity for doing this business, but the first informant was not giving no objection certificate. He took every step to see that applicant No. 1 does not get supply of electricity for his business. It is not the case of the Applicant No. 1 that as per the agreement between him and landlord, the landlord is bound to supply the electricity. Further, the Electricity Board seeks no objection of landlord only to verify that the possession of the tenant is authorised. There is no other purpose behind obtaining such no objection from landlord. The landlord cannot prevent the tenant from availing such facility at his own cost.
It is now well settled proposition of law that electricity is a basic amenity of which a person cannot be deprived. Electricity cannot be declined to a tenant on the ground of failure/refusal of the landlord to issue no objection certificate. All that the electricity supply authority is required to examine is whether the applicant for electricity connection is in occupation of the premises in question. Be that as it may, the High Court clearly fell in error in quashing the FIR. It cannot be said that fabrication and/or creation of records and/or forging a signature does not constitute an offence under the Indian Penal Code. The High Court completely overlooked the definition of cheating in Section 415 of the IPC. It is however made clear that electricity supply granted, shall not be discontinued, subject to compliance by the Respondents of the terms and conditions of supply of electricity by the electricity department including payment of charges for the same."10
SN, J WP_14390_2024
11. It has been agreed and represented by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and also learned counsel appearing on behalf of the 5th respondent that the petitioner and 5th respondent both would cooperate and put-forth their pleas in support of their respective cases and the respondent Nos. 3 and 4 shall be directed to consider the same in accordance to law and take a decision in the matter Accordingly, this consent order is being passed.
12. Taking into consideration:
a) The view of the Apex Court in the judgments (referred to and extracted above) i. K.C.Ninan Vs. Kerala State of Electricity Board and others reported in 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 453 ii. Chandu Khamaru Vs. Nayan Malik and Others reported in (2011) 12 Supreme Court Cases 314 iii. between Dilip (dead) through LRs Vs. Satish and others reported in 2022 LiveLaw 570
b) The submissions put-forth by both the learned counsel on record 11 SN, J WP_14390_2024
c) The respondent Nos. 3 and 4 are directed to provide an opportunity of personal hearing to both the petitioner and 5th respondent who is representing the 6th respondent/complainant and the respondents are directed to decide the subject issue duly considering the explanation of the petitioner dated 03.05.2024 in accordance to law in the light of the observations of the Apex Court in the various judgments (referred to and extracted above) and take a decision in the matter in accordance to law within a period of three (03) weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of the order and duly communicate the decision to the petitioner.
13. Till the above exercise is initiated and concluded by the respondent Nos. 3 and 4, the interim orders granted by this Court on 10.06.2024 in I.A.No.01 of 2024 shall continue to remain in force (referred to and extracted above).
14. With these above observations, the Writ Petition is disposed of. However, there shall be no order as to costs.
12
SN, J WP_14390_2024 Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this Writ Petition, shall stand closed.
___________________________ MRS. JUSTICE SUREPALLI NANDA Date: 08.08.2024 ktm Note:CC by today