[Cites 3, Cited by 0]

Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur

Smt. Usha Kalla vs State Of Rajasthan (2025:Rj-Jd:53211) on 8 December, 2025

Author: Nupur Bhati

Bench: Nupur Bhati

[2025:RJ-JD:53211]

      HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
                       JODHPUR
                S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 18757/2025

Smt. Usha Kalla W/o Shri Tejkaran Ji Kalla, Aged About 46 Years,
R/o G-100, Shastri Nagar, Jodhpur, Rajasthan.
                                                                    ----Petitioner
                                    Versus
1.       State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary To The
         Government,          Energy           Department           (Electricity),
         Secretariat, Jaipur.
2.       The Chief Engineer (Zonal), Jodhpur Zone, Jodhpur
         Discom, Jodhpur.
3.       The Assistant Engineer (N.u.kh. B Iii), Jodhpur Vidhyut
         Vitran Nigam Ltd., Jodhpur.
                                                                 ----Respondents


For Petitioner(s)         :     Mr. S.D. Purohit with
                                Mr. R.S. Mali
For Respondent(s)         :     Mr. Harish Bera


               HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE NUPUR BHATI

Order

08/12/2025

1. The instant writ petition has been filed by the petitioner

under Article 226 of the Constitution of India claiming following

relief(s):

"It is, therefore, most humbly and respectfully prayed that this writ petition may kindly be allowed and by an appropriate writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus or certiorari, the impugned order Annexure-6 dated 15.09.2025 deserves to be quashed and set aside and the respondents may kindly be directed to grant the electric connection for the said residential house G-100, Shastri Nagar of the petitioner forthwith by allowing her application Annexure-5 in the interest of justice.

xxxxxx"

2. Factual prism obtaining in the present case is that the

petitioner, residing at residential house being House No.G-100,

(Uploaded on 08/12/2025 at 06:10:09 PM)

[2025:RJ-JD:53211] (2 of 6) [CW-18757/2025]

Shastri Nagar, Jodhpur, Rajasthan since 1999 by virtue of

marriage into the family of late Shambhu Dutt Ji Kalla, asserts her

right to residence and electricity supply. Late Shambhu Dutt Ji

Kalla held a valid patta for the house since 1969 and resided there

until his death in 2019. Before his demise, he executed a Will on

14.09.2017 (Annex.3) distributing the property shares among his

wife, petitioner, and offspring. The property has never been

partitioned, and each beneficiary has the right to use the house.

Despite this, the wife of late Shambhu Dutt Ji Kalla and two sons

purportedly sold the property without legal partition, claiming a

majority share, by executing a registered sale deed to third

parties. Following this, the electricity connection at the house,

held since construction in the name of late Shambhu Dutt Ji Kalla,

was disconnected by the respondents on 15.07.2025, allegedly

under the influence of the purchasers who transferred the

connection to their names. This disconnection caused severe

hardship to the petitioner and her dependent daughters. The

petitioner applied for a new electricity connection vide application

(Annex.5), completing all formalities, but the respondents rejected

the application vide order dated 15.09.2025 (Annex.6) and thus,

being aggrieved of the same, petitioner has preferred the present

writ petition.

3. Counsel representing the petitioner submits that the

petitioner being an occupier of the premises, was peacefully

residing in the house, however, on the basis of some dispute, the

electricity connection of the residential house being House No.G-

100, Shastri Nagar, Jodhpur, Rajasthan, was disconnected by the

respondents on 15.07.2025; whereafter, petitioner has been

(Uploaded on 08/12/2025 at 06:10:09 PM)

[2025:RJ-JD:53211] (3 of 6) [CW-18757/2025]

running from pillar to post, requesting the respondents to restore

the electricity connection. He submits that the respondents on

whimsical grounds, rejected the application of the petitioner vide

order dated 15.09.2025 (Annex.6) stating therein that for the

purpose of restoring the electricity connection, petitioner is

required to get the No Objection Certificate consent from the other

co-owners. He submits that under Section 43 of the Indian

Electricity Act, 2003, in case of application filed by the owner or

occupier of any premises, respondents are under an obligation to

supply the electricity connection, however, in the present case,

respondents have assigned whimsical reason while rejecting the

application of the petitioner.

4. In support of his contentions, counsel for the petitioner

places reliance upon the order of the High Court of Calcutta in the

case of Md. Jasim Ansari v. West Bengal State Electricity

Distribution Company Ltd. & Ors. : W.P. 4968(W) of 2017

decided on 03.03.2017; while submitting, that the High Court of

Calcutta has held that in view of Section 43 of the Indian

Electricity Act, 2003, there cannot be any ground of distinction

between the occupier and unlawful occupier and once the person

is found to be in settled possession, he is entitled to have the

supply of electricity at his premises in occupation.

5. On the basis of these grounds, counsel for the petitioner

implored the Court to accept the writ petition and quash the

impugned order dated 15.09.2025 (Annex.6).

6. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the

respondents opposes the submissions advanced by petitioner's

counsel and submits that the petitioner has failed to produce any

(Uploaded on 08/12/2025 at 06:10:09 PM)

[2025:RJ-JD:53211] (4 of 6) [CW-18757/2025]

documentary evidence to substantiate or establish an undisputed

sole ownership of the said property or any portion thereof for the

purpose of electricity supply. He further submits that the petitioner

has neither furnished any consent from the other registered co-

owners, nor sought requisite directions from a competent court in

this regard. Thus, on these grounds, counsel for the respondents

submits that the respondents rightly discontinued the electricity

connection of the petitioner's premises.

7. I have heard and considered the submissions advanced by

learned counsel representing the parties as well as perused the

material available on record.

8. In order to decide whether the respondents have rightly

rejected the claim of the petitioner, Section 43 of the Indian

Electricity Act, 2003 is required to be perused. Section 43 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 extension or commissioning or within such period as may be specified by the Appropriate Commission:

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.

[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.]

(Uploaded on 08/12/2025 at 06:10:09 PM)

[2025:RJ-JD:53211] (5 of 6) [CW-18757/2025]

(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."

9. Upon perusal of Section 43 of the Indian Electricity Act,

2003, it is reflected that an application for electricity supply can be

made by either the owner or the occupier of any premises. Thus,

in the present case, the petitioner is not obliged to produce any

documentary evidence to substantiate or establish her claim of

clear and undisputed sole ownership of the entire property or any

part thereof, nor is she required to furnish consent from the

registered co-owners or, obtain any direction from a competent

court for the purpose of securing the electricity connection.

10. This Court also takes into consideration the decision passed

by the High Court of Calcutta dated 03.03.2017 in the case of Md.

Jasim Ansari (supra) and the relevant paras of the said judgment

are reproduced hereunder:

"xxxxxxx

5. Section 43 of the Electricity Act, 2003 does not make any distinction between a lawful occupier and unlaw-ful occupier. Once the person is found to be in settled possession, he is entitled to have the supply of electric-ity at his premises in occupation. Until a tenant is evicted by a decree for eviction passed by a Civil Court, he has every right to enjoy the facilities and amenities attached to such tenancy as a statutory tenant and, there-fore, this Court does not find any substance in the submission of the private respondent.

6. If the tenant desires not to have the supply through a meter of the landlord, as he is always exposed to the risk of disconnection, this Court does not find any fetter in the law, more particularly, as the occupier of the premises to apply for separate electric meter in his name to enjoy the uninterrupted

(Uploaded on 08/12/2025 at 06:10:09 PM)

[2025:RJ-JD:53211] (6 of 6) [CW-18757/2025]

supply of electricity through the Distribution Company, obviously, upon payment of energy charges.

7. The Distribution Company is, therefore, directed to make an inspection and install the meter in the name of the petitioner at the common meter board position subject, however, upon fulfillment of other conditions and criterion required therefor, within six weeks from date.

8. The employees of the Distribution Company is permitted to approach the Inspector in-Charge of the local police station for assistance in carrying out the aforesaid work in the event any obstruction and/or distur-bances are caused by the private respondent.

9. If such approach is made, the Inspector in-Charge of the concerned police station is directed to render all assistance and help to the employees of the Distribution Company in this regard.