Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Dipak Haradhan Belel vs West Bengal State Electricity ... on 26 September, 2011
Author: Jayanta Kumar Biswas
Bench: Jayanta Kumar Biswas
In The High Court At Calcutta
Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction
Appellate Side
Present : The Hon'ble Mr Justice Jayanta Kumar Biswas
W.P.No.14384(W) of 2011
Dipak Haradhan Belel
-vs-
West Bengal State Electricity Distribution Company Limited & Ors.
Mr. Avijit Chakraborty ....for the petitioner
Mr. Rammohan Chattopadhyay ...for the licensee
Mr. Ayan Bhattacharya
Mr. Anjan Datta
Mr. P.K. Gupta ...for the private respondent
Heard on : September 26, 2011 Judgment on : September 26, 2011 The Court : The petitioner in this art.226 petition is alleging that though he is entitled to use the property in question for taking supply of electricity to his premises, for objection of the private respondent who has no right, title or interest in the property, West Bengal State Electricity Distribution Company Limited, a licensee under the Electricity Act, 2003, has refused to give him supply.
Referring to the document at p.22 advocate for the petitioner submits that the sketch map of the property will reveal that the petitioner is entitled to take supply of electricity to plot no.504 using the common passage using which the other co-owners of the property have taken supply.
Advocate for the private respondent, a co-sharer of the property in question, has disputed the correctness of the sketch map of the property. He has said that there is no reason to accept the sketch map as a valid piece of evidence. His submission is that the petitioner has no right to use the property in question for taking supply of electricity to his premises.
It is evident that in the name of failure on the part of the licensee to give supply of electricity in the discharge of its statutory obligation under s.43 of the Electricity Act, 2003 the petitioner is actually seeking adjudication of a pure private dispute by the Writ Court.
The question whether the petitioner has a right to use the property in question cannot be decided by the licensee; nor do I find any reason to decide the question in exercise of power under art.226.
In my opinion, the petitioner's remedy, if any, was before the Civil and Criminal Courts. Once the appropriate Court passes an order that he has a right to use the property in question for taking supply of electricity to his premises, the licensee will have no difficulty in giving him supply using the property.
With these observations, the petition is disposed of saying that the petitioner is free to approach the Civil and Criminal Courts seeking reliefs according to law. No costs. Certified xerox.
(Jayanta Kumar Biswas, J) sb