Akshay Lodha vs The West Bengal State Electricity ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 6711 Cal

AD-10
Ct No.09
19.09.2022
TN
                            WPA No. 21120 of 2022

                               Akshay Lodha
                                    Vs.
                 The West Bengal State Electricity Distribution
                        Company Limited and others


             Mr. Sujay Bandyopadhyay,
             Mr. Shambhu Mahato,
             Mr. Jugu Jyoti Das
                                                   .... for the petitioner

             Mr. Srijan Nayak
                                                   .... for the WBSEDCL

             Mr. Tushar Sinha Mahapatra
                                      .... for the respondent no.7

Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that

on the allegation of apprehended nexus between the

petitioner and the private respondent, a defaulting

consumer in respect of a different plot, the petitioner's

application for new electricity connection has been

refused unless the petitioner pays up the entire

outstanding dues of the private respondent.

Learned counsel appearing for the West Bengal

State Electricity Distribution Company Limited

(WBSEDCL) submits that in order to show nexus,

even prima facie, the WBSEDCL officials have to

consult the relevant records and give appropriate

instructions to learned counsel for the WBSEDCL for

the latter to prepare an affidavit-in-opposition.

However, it appears from the refusal (annexed at

page-49 as Annexure-P5 to the writ petition) of the

WBSEDCL that the ground for refusal was "...on

establishing nexus with the previous consumer(s)...",

the petitioner "shall" be responsible for payment of

outstanding charges.

In view of the assertion being so vague, there is

nothing on record to show even prima facie that the

WBSEDCL discharged the onus, cast upon it in law,

to establish such present nexus or past nexus

between the petitioner and the defaulting consumer.

Be that as it may, since learned counsel for the

WBSEDCL insists that the WBSEDCL shall use an

affidavit, despite the court having offered for learned

counsel to produce the necessary instructions and/or

papers to show prima facie nexus to ascertain whether

affidavits need be directed in the matter, such

opportunity is refused to the WBSEDCL.

It appears palpably from the refusal of the

WBSEDCL dated February 11, 2022 that the

allegation of the WBSEDCL was as vague as can be,

referring to some apprehended future nexus, which

would be established in future by the WBSEDCL for

claiming the outstanding dues, as a tool to refuse new

electricity connection to the petitioner.

As discussed above, it is well-settled that the

burden of showing the nexus is on the person alleging

such nexus, in the present case, the WBSEDCL.

Having squarely failed to do so in its refusal, as per

the principle laid down in Mohinder Singh Gill's

judgment, post facto explanation or furnishing of

reasons cannot cure the defect in the refusal of the

WBSEDCL.

Hence, there is little or no scope of any further

directions being passed in the matter.

The matter shall, however, be enlisted day after

tomorrow (21.09.2022) as a last chance to the

WBSEDCL to furnish any relevant document(s) to

show, at least prima facie, that there was a nexus

between the petitioner and the defaulting consumer

pertaining to a period prior to the filing of the writ

application and/or contemporaneous to the letter

dated February 11, 2022.

The matter shall be enlisted under the heading

"For Orders" fairly at the top of the list on September

21, 2022.

(Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya, J.)