Zile Singh vs Municipal Corporation Of Delhi ...
1997 Latest Caselaw 191 Del

JUDGMENT

Y.K. Sabharwal, J.

(1) The petitioner prays that a writ of mandamus be issued directing the respondents to immediately instal energise the electric connection of the petitioner bearing No. 1503/IP/126566 for industrial power supply and No. 1503/DL/126567 for domestic light/power supply at his premises bearing Khasra No. 443 situated in the Lal Dora Area of the year 1908-09 of Village Neseerpur,Pelhi which is owned and possessed by the petitioner.

(2) It is not disputed that the petitioner applied for the aforesaid connections sometime in September, 1989. Admittedly, the sanction was granted by Desu on 4th July, 1991 and the petitioner also made the deposit of the requisite amount on that date itself. It has also been admitted in the counter-affidavit filed by Desu that since the connection was sought in rural area, the expenses for erecting the poles and laying service line were to be borne by the Desu as per commercial practice and thus the estimates for erection of new poles and installation of new service line were accordingly prepared, sanction was obtained from the Competent Authority and the work orders were issued and sent for execution. Inspite of all this the connection was not energized on the alleged ground that before the extension of the mains and erection of poles could be carried out, the test report as submitted by the petitioner became stale because by then more than six months from the date of issuance of the test report had passed. It has further been pleaded that later vide Notification dated 24th October, 1994, Village Naseerpur was urbanised and the effect of urbanisation was that the petitioner was required to bear all the expenses of extension of mains and is also required to obtain a 'No Objection Certificate' from the Town Planner and under these circumstances the electric connection was not installed at the premises of the petitioner. The stand taken by the respondents for non-installation of the electric connection to say the least is most irresponsible. It is not at all clear that after the sanction in July, 1991 what Desu has been doing for next over three years before the urbanisation of the village in October, 1994. The stand about the test report becoming stale is also misconceived. It has also not been stated that Desu ever wrote to the petitioner to furnish a fresh test report. The validity period of the test report is six months as stated, it will mean that ordinarily the work for installation of electric connection is likely to be completed in' six months. It has been submitted before us that the test report was filed by the petitioner alongwith the application in September, 1989. If that is so, that report became stale even before the sanction and no effect was made by Desu to inform the petitioner in writing that he should furnish fresh test report. All the grounds taken in the counter-affidavit to deprive the petitioner of the electric connection are wholly extraneous and what in fact is the reason for not providing the electric connection are not far to seek.

(3) Under aforesaid circumstances, we make the Rule absolute and direct Desu to forthwith provide to the petitioner the electric connection sanctioned in July, 1991. It will not be open to Desu to claim that the petitioner would be required to make the payments on the ground that the village has been urbanised vide Notification dated 24th October, 1994. The petitioner would also not be required to produce any 'No Objection Certificate' from the Town Planner. The electric connection will be granted immediately and in any case not later than four weeks from today.

(4) The petition is disposed of accordingly. A copy of the order be given Dasti to Counsel for the parties.