[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur

Veerma Ram vs Managing Director (2026:Rj-Jd:15922) on 7 April, 2026

Author: Kuldeep Mathur

Bench: Kuldeep Mathur

[2026:RJ-JD:15922]

      HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
                       JODHPUR
                 S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1008/2026

Veerma Ram S/o Shri Sujana Ram, Aged About 49 Years,
Resident Of Vishnoiyon Ki Dhani, Sarnau, Tehsil Sanchaore,
District Jalore, Raj.
                                                                    ----Petitioner
                                    Versus
1.       Managing Director, Jodhpur Vidyut Vitran Nigam Limited,
         Jodhpur.
2.       Executive Engineer (Pws), Jodhpur Vidyut Vitran Nigam
         Limited, Raniwara, District Jalore.
3.       Executive Engineer (Pws), Jodhpur Vidyut Vitran Nigam
         Limited, Sanchore, District Jalore.
4.       Assistant Engineer (O And M), Jodhpur Vidyut Vitran
         Nigam Limited, Raniwara, District Jalore.
5.       Assistant Engineer (O And M), Jodhpur Vidyut Vitran
         Nigam Limited, Sankad, District Jalore.
                                                                 ----Respondents


For Petitioner(s)         :     Mr. Hapu Ram
For Respondent(s)         :     Mr. Budha Ram Bishnoi
                                Mr. D.S. Sodha



            HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP MATHUR

Order

07/04/2026

By way of filing the present writ petition, the petitioner has

prayed for the following reliefs:-

"In the light of facts stated above and the grounds mentioned therein, it is, therefore, most humbly prayed: -

1. That by an appropriate writ, order or direction the instant writ petition may kindly be ordered to be allowed;

2. That by an appropriate writ, order or direction quashing the illegal action of the respondents in withholding the petitioner's domestic electricity connection, despite the petitioner's valid application dated 16.08.2013 (Annexure-1), and direct the respondents to sanction and release the

(Uploaded on 08/04/2026 at 03:29:29 PM)

[2026:RJ-JD:15922] (2 of 4) [CW-1008/2026]

domestic electricity connection forthwith in favour of the petitioner.

3. That by an appropriate writ, order or direction declare that the decree dated 16.01.2018 (Annexure-3) and the appellate judgment dated 25.07.2022 (Annexure-4) pertain exclusively to the agricultural electricity connection of the tubewell in Khasra No. 34 and have no bearing whatsoever on the petitioner's right to obtain a domestic electricity connection for his residential house.

4. That by an appropriate writ, order or direction restraining the respondents from rejecting or withholding the petitioner's domestic connection application on the basis of the said civil decree (Annexure-3) or appellate judgment (Annexure-4).

5. That any other appropriate writ, order or direction, which this Hon'ble Court may deem it just and proper in the facts and circumstance of the case, may kindly be issued.

6. Costs of this writ petition may kindly be awarded in favour of petitioners."

2. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and upon

perusal of the material available on record, this Court finds that

the petitioner's father, in the year 2013, applied for an agricultural

electricity connection for his tubewell situated in Village Sarnau,

Tehsil Sanchore, District Jalore. However, one of his relative,

Vridha S/o Hukma, instituted a civil suit before the Court of Senior

Civil Judge, Sanchore, being Civil Original Case No. 15/2013,

seeking a restraining order against him from obtaining an

electricity connection to the said well.

3. The Court of Senior Civil Judge, Sanchore, vide judgment

and decree dated 16.01.2018, decreed the said suit and restrained

the respondent-Electricity Department from issuing an electricity

connection in favour of the petitioner's father.

4. Aggrieved by the aforesaid judgment and decree dated

16.01.2018, the petitioner's father preferred an appeal before the

Court of Additional District Judge, Sanchore, being Civil Appeal No.

20/2020 titled "Sujan Vs. Vridha & Ors.". The said appeal came to

be dismissed by the appellate court vide order dated 25.07.2022.

(Uploaded on 08/04/2026 at 03:29:29 PM)

[2026:RJ-JD:15922] (3 of 4) [CW-1008/2026]

5. A second appeal against the judgment and decree dated

25.07.2022 passed by the Court of Additional District Judge,

Sanchore is stated to be pending adjudication before this Court.

6. It is the case of the petitioner that the respondent-Electricity

Department, under the garb of the judgment and decree passed

by the competent civil court, is not issuing even a domestic

electricity connection in his favour, despite his repeated requests

and willingness to deposit the requisite fee/charges, thereby

depriving him of the basic amenity of electricity without any valid

justification. Accordingly, a prayer has been made that a direction

be issued to the respondents to forthwith provide a domestic

electricity connection to the petitioner.

7. This Court, upon perusal of the material available on record,

finds that the civil suit filed by Vridha, being Civil Original Case

No. 15/2013, was decreed by the competent civil court in the

following terms:

"अतः वादी का वाद बाबत स्थायी निषेधाज्ञा व आज्ञात्मक व्यादे श विरूद्ध प्रतिवादीगण डिकी किया जाकर प्रतिवादीगण को इस आशय की स्थायी निषेधाज्ञा से पाबंद किया जाता है कि वे बाद पत्र के पैरा संख्या में अंकित भमि ू यों के राजस्व न्यायालय से विधिवत ् विभाजन हुये बिना किसी प्रकार का विद्युत कनेक्शन जारी नहीं करें और न ही प्रतिवादी संख्या 4 किसी प्रकार का विद्यत ु कनेक्शन प्राप्त करने की कार्यवाही करें । उभय पक्ष खर्चा मुकदमा स्वयं वहन करें गे। तदानुसार डिकी पर्चा बनाया जावे।"

8. Admittedly, the appeal against the judgment and decree

passed in Civil Original Case No. 15/2013 has already been

dismissed. From a perusal of the said judgment and decree, it is

evident that the competent civil court has restrained the

respondent-Electricity Department from issuing any type of

electricity connection in favour of the petitioner. The decree is

(Uploaded on 08/04/2026 at 03:29:29 PM)

[2026:RJ-JD:15922] (4 of 4) [CW-1008/2026]

not confined merely to an agricultural connection, as contended by

the petitioner.

9. Even otherwise, if the contention of the petitioner is that he

cannot be deprived of the basic right to electricity and, therefore,