Calcutta High Court
Ashoke Bhowmick vs Cesc Limited And Ors on 19 August, 2025
Author: Aniruddha Roy
Bench: Aniruddha Roy
Form No. J(2)
N THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTION
ORIGINAL SIDE
WPO/576/2025
ASHOKE BHOWMICK
Vs
CESC LIMITED AND ORS
PRESENT :
THE HON'BLE JUSTICE ANIRUDDHA ROY
For Petitioner Mr. Krishna Das Poddar, Adv.
Ms. Mondira Barman, Adv.
For CESC Mr. Ram Chandra Gucchait, Adv.
For Respondent Nos. 6 and 7 Mr. Sabir Ahmed, Adv.
Mr. Vishwarup Acharyya, Adv.
Mr. Dhiman Banerjee, Adv.
Heard on : 19.08.2025
Judgment on : 19.08.2025
ANIRUDDHA ROY, J. :
Upon urgency being pleaded on mentioning and since the regular
determination has been assigned to this Court, this writ petition has been
taken up for consideration by publishing in the daily supplementary list.
Facts:
1. The solitary grievance of the petitioner is that despite due application
being submitted for obtaining electricity connection at the subject premises,
the CESC authority has failed to provide electricity connection.
Submissions :
2. Mr. Sabir Ahmed, learned counsel appearing for the private
respondent Nos. 6 and 7 submits that they are the brothers of the writ
petitioner. Owing to a property dispute involving the self-same premises
where the petitioner claims one floor being the third floor of the premises,
the brothers are at logger head as co-sharers of the self-same immovable
property.
3. Mr. Ahmed has placed an order dated May 15, 2025 passed by a co-
ordinate Bench in WPA/9992/2025, the same is taken on record. The
order shows that the three brothers being logger head with each other, this
writ petitioner has filed the writ petition alleging police in action and
claiming protection against allegedly threat exercised by the private
respondents herein on the petitioner. The co-ordinate Bench passed
direction upon the jurisdictional police authority to keep strict vigil at the
local along with other consequential directions.
4. Mr. Ahmed submits that after the said order was passed, the
petitioner served a notice dated May 23, 2025 through its learned
advocate, a copy is taken on record, wherefrom it appears that the
petitioner neither was nor possession of the premises. The petitioner
offered a particular amount to pay to the private respondents and
requested them upon receiving such sum to handover possession of the
third floor to the petitioner. The said sum was offered as the alleged
construction cost. These facts according to Mr. Ahmed shows that the
petitioner is still not in possession of the premises.
5. This writ petition has been filed in gross suppression of facts and
suppressing said order of the co-ordinate bench dated May 15, 2025.
Referring to paragraph 5 of the writ petition he submits mere photographs
could not be suffice to show that the petitioner is in possession.
6. He further submits that on the ground of suppression alone, this
writ petition should be dismissed. Unless the amount tendered by the
petitioner is paid, he cannot be put into possession.
7. On query being raised by this Court, Mr. Ahmed submits that the
private respondents as of now, has not initiated either any civil proceeding
or any criminal proceeding against the writ petitioner.
8. Mr. Guchhait, learned Counsel for CESC submits that on three
occasions CESC officials have visited the premises for providing electricity
connection to the petitioner at the existing meter board(loop meter) after
due inspection and on each occasion CESC officials were vehemently
resisted by the private respondent nos. 5 & 6. Accordingly, CESC could
not carry out its statutory obligation.
Decision :
9. After considering the rival contentions of the parties and on perusal
of the materials on record, it appears to this Court that, the private
respondents have not denied the ownership of the petitioner, as a co-owner
of the premises. Even if, a co-owner is not in possession of a joint
property, unless partitioned, such a co-owner has right, title and interest
on every inch of the undivided property.
10. The law is equally well settled that subject to compliance of all
statutory requirements and subject to payment of all statutory levy and
charges required to be paid in accordance with law, anybody who intends
to obtain electricity supply, as of right is entitled to receive such electricity
supply. Even a trespasser is also entitled to receive electricity supply upon
compliance of the statutory requirements.
11. The disputes raised by Mr. Ahmed, learned Counsel appearing for
the private respondents are purely civil in nature, which cannot prevail
upon the statutory right of a co-owner to obtain electricity supply. The
private respondents have not filed any civil suit against the writ petitioner
with regard to the said alleged disputes. The disputes are purely amongst
the co-owners with regard to their alleged right of occupation at the
premises, which has got nothing to do with the statutory right of a co-
owner, to obtain electricity supply in accordance with law.
12. The order of the co-ordinate Bench dated May 15, 2025 was passed
wholly on a different perspective and even if the same is not disclosed in
the instant writ petition, the same shall not amount to any material
suppression. The law is also well settled in this regard that a suppression
has to be a material suppression, which would have a bearing on the
adjudication of the proceeding. The civil dispute even if exists amongst the
co-owners, the same would have no bearing or relevance in obtaining
electricity connection by a co-owner, which is his/her statutory right.
13. In view of the forgoing reasons and discussions, the objections
raised on behalf of the private respondent nos. 5 & 6 stand overruled and
rejected, in so far as right to obtain electricity connection is concerned as
claimed by the petitioner through this writ petition.
14. Accordingly, the respondent no.3 upon causing due inspection of the
premises and on verification of all the relevant documents and records
required to be produced by the petitioner in accordance with law and
subject to compliance of all the statutory requirements including making
of necessary payments of levies and charges payable by the petitioner
under the law for obtaining electricity supply at the premises and upon
being duly satisfied with all the statutory compliance, shall provide the
necessary electricity supply by completing all the formalities at the subject
premises in the name of the petitioner by installing electricity meter at the
existing and earmarked common meter board positively within a period of
72 working hours after compliance of all the formalities by the petitioner.
15. In the event of any default being detected on the part of the
petitioner in complying the statutory requirements, the CESC authority
shall be free to take steps in accordance with law by using its own
discretion.
16. It is made clear that this order shall not create any right or equity
with regard to the right of occupation or possession of the petitioner at the
premises and this order shall be restricted only for the purpose of
obtaining electricity connection at the premises in the name of the
petitioner and not beyond that.
17. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the
property dispute, if any, amongst the co-sharers of the property.
18. It is also made clear that this order shall have no bearing in the
event any civil or criminal proceeding is initiated by either of the parties
against each other.
19. In the event, any police assistance is required by CESC Limited, it
shall request the respondent no.4 to provide for the same and the
respondent no.4 shall provide all possible assistance to CESC Limited. For
such purpose, whatever cost and expenses, the same shall have to be
incurred by the petitioner and the police authorities shall provide the
necessary money receipts for the same.
20. Since, affidavits are not called for the allegations made in this writ
petition are deemed not to have been admitted by the respondent.
21. With the above observations and directions, this writ petition being
WPO/576/2025 stands disposed of without any order as to costs.
(Aniruddha Roy, J.)
A Dey
