Reemi Barman vs The Assam Power Distribution Company ...
2025 Latest Caselaw 1816 Gua

Gauhati High Court

Reemi Barman vs The Assam Power Distribution Company ... on 8 January, 2025

Author: Michael Zothankhuma

Bench: Michael Zothankhuma

                                                                   Page No.# 1/4

GAHC010003552025




                                                            undefined

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

                           Case No. : WP(C)/97/2025

         REEMI BARMAN
         W/O LATE RANA BAISHYA, R/O HOUSE NO. 70, NILIMA KUTIR, DR. B.K.K.
         ROAD, OPPOSITE MEEN BHAWAN, SARABHATTY, ULUBARI, KAMRUP (M),
         GUWAHATI-781008



         VERSUS

         THE ASSAM POWER DISTRIBUTION COMPANY LIMITED AND 5 ORS.
         A GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM UNDERTAKING DULY INCORPORATED
         UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956, HAVING ITS OFFICE AT BIJULEE
         BHAWAN, PALTAN BAZAR, GUWAHATI-781001, KAMRUP (M),
         REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR

         2:THE SUB DIVISIONAL OFFICER
          GARBHANGA ELECTRICAL SUB-DIVISION
         APDCL (LAR)
          BASISTHA
          GUWAHATI
          PIN-781029
          KAMRUP (M)
         ASSAM

         3:THE SUB-DIVISIONAL ENGINEER
          GARBHANGA ELECTRICAL SUB-DIVISION
         APDCL (LAR)
          BASISTHA
          GUWAHATI
          PIN-781029
          KAMRUP (M)
         ASSAM

         4:THE ASSISTANT GENERAL MANAGER
                                                                           Page No.# 2/4

             GED (C)
             APDCL (LAR)
             BASISTHA
             GUWAHATI
             PIN-781029
             KAMRUP (M)
             ASSAM

            5:NILIMA BAISHYA
            W/O LATE MANIK CHANDRA BAISHYA
             R/O VIDYA MANDIR PATH
             BHETAPARA
             HOUSE NO. 71
             PIN-781028
             GUWAHATI
             KAMRUP (M)
            ASSAM

            6:RAKESH BAISHYA
             S/O LATE MANIK CHANDRA BAISHYA
             R/O VIDYA MANDIR PATH
             BHETAPARA
             HOUSE NO. 71
             PIN-781028
             GUWAHATI
             KAMRUP (M)
            ASSA

Advocate for the Petitioner   : MR. M K CHOUDHURY,

Advocate for the Respondent : SC, APDCL,




                                  BEFORE
                HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MICHAEL ZOTHANKHUMA

                                           ORDER

08.01.2025

Heard Mr. M.K. Choudhury, learned Sr. Counsel for the petitioner, who submits that the petitioner has been in possession over a plot of land owned by her mother-in-law, i.e., the respondent No.5. He submits that the petitioner has been drawing a steady income from renting the premises constructed over the said land.

Page No.# 3/4

2. The petitioner's counsel submits that the petitioner came to learn on 16.09.2022 that the brother-in-law of the petitioner, i.e., the respondent No.6, had somehow managed to influence the respondent No.5 to sell the entire plot of land from which the petitioner had been regularly collecting rent, which was the only mode of sustenance for the petitioner and her minor children. He further submits that the respondent No.2, without any notice or intimation, disconnected the electricity supply to the petitioner's plot of land and it's structures from the month of October, 2024, for which a temporary connection was applied for by the petitioner and the same was renewed till 08.01.2025. The petitioner's counsel submits that the respondents may be directed not to disconnect the electricity supply given to the petitioner's premises. The petitioner's counsel further submits that the petitioner is willing to pay whatever necessary charges are required for extension of the temporary connection made by the APDCL.

3. Issue notice returnable in 4(four) weeks.

4. Mr. K.P. Pathak, learned counsel accepts notice on behalf of the respondent Nos.1-4.

5. Petitioner to take steps for service of notice upon the respondent Nos.5 & 6 by registered post with A/D within 3 days.

6. A perusal of the averments made in the writ petition shows that the respondent No.5 and not the petitioner, is the owner of the land in question. However, there is a dispute with regard to whether the petitioner or the respondent No.5 would have some interest over the building constructed on the land of the respondent No.5. The petitioner is claiming that she is collecting rent from the premises constructed on the respondent No.5's land. The same would have to be proved/verified. In any event, in Page No.# 4/4

terms of the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Dilip (Dead) Through Lrs. Vs. Satish and Ors., reported in 2022 SCC OnLine SC 810, wherein it has been held that electricity cannot be declined to a tenant on the ground of failure/refusal of the landlord to issue no objection certificate and that 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, the issue would require further consideration, inasmuch as, the petitioner is not a tenant and not residing therein.

7. List the matter on 12.02.2025.

JUDGE

Comparing Assistant