Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Sk. Samsul Haque vs The West Bengal State Electricity ... on 13 December, 2011
Author: Jayanta Kumar Biswas
Bench: Jayanta Kumar Biswas
1 In The High Court At Calcutta Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction Appellate Side Present:
The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Jayanta Kumar Biswas.
W.P.No. 19924 (W) of 2011 Sk. Samsul Haque v.
The West Bengal State Electricity Distribution Company Limited & Ors.
Mr. Khwaja A. Rahman ... for the petitioner.
Mr. Srijan Nayak Mr. Raja Saha ... for the licensee.
Mr. Gautam Dutta ... for the State.
Heard on: December 13, 2011 Judgment on: December 13, 2011.
The Court: The petitioner in this WP under art.226 dated November 24, 2011 is questioning a decision of West Bengal State Electricity Distribution Company Limited, a licensee under the Electricity Act, 2003, dated January 4,2010( at p. 22).
Disposing of the petitioner's request for reconnection of his supply that according to him was disconnected alleging theft of energy in 1992, the licensee has given the decision, which is quoted below:
" As the service line was disconnected since 1994(bearing S/C No.S/!/2112), so as per regulation of W.B.E.R.C. 36/WBERC 4.6.1 if any consumer remains disconnected continuously for a period of 180 days then the agreement of the licensee with the consumer for supply of electricity shall be deemed to have been terminated with consequently effect on expiry of the said period so your agreement was terminated accordingly, so question of reconnection may not be raised."
It is evident from the impugned decision that the licensee has turned down the request for reconnection of the supply applying the provisions of the West Bengal Electricity Regulatory Commission (Electricity Supply Code) Regulations, 2007, reg. 4.6.1, that provides that if a supply disconnected under any provision of the Act or regulations remains as such for a period of 180 2 days, then the agreement between the licensee and the consumer will stand automatically terminated.
The admitted position is that the supply in question had been terminated many years before the 2007 regulations came into force. Nothing in the regulations provides that the provisions thereof will apply also to a case of disconnection such as the one of the petitioner. The disconnection had been effected under provisions of the Indian Electricity Act, 2010, since repealed, and the rules made thereunder. Hence the question of reconnection, if any, was to be decided applying the law that was existing at the date of disconnection, not any subsequent law such as the 2007 regulations.
Besides, it is reasonable to say that the service installations, apparatus, etc. remaining absolutely unused for more than fifteen years (at least) have become absolutely unworthy use. It is not to possible to conclude that the service disconnected in 1992 or 1994, as the case may be, can be reconnected, even though the petitioner, as submitted by his counsel, is ready and willing to pay the outstanding energy charge, if any, as a condition for reconnection of the supply.
It is, however, necessary to note that the petitioner's acquittal by the Criminal Court in 2009 has absolutely nothing to do with his request for reconnection of the supply. It is another matter whether he will decide to pursue his reconnection request or apply for a new connection expressing his willingness to pay the outstanding energy charge as a condition for a new connection. The position, however, is that the impugned decision cannot be sustained.
For these reasons, I set aside the impugned order, allow the WP to this extent and order as follows. The petitioner will be free to apply for a fresh connection or pursue his request for reconnection of the supply that was disconnected in 1992 or 1994, as the case may be. In either case the licensee shall decide his request according to the law that is applicable to the case. The decision shall be given as expeditiously as possible and it shall be communicated to the petitioner without any delay. No costs. Certified xerox.
sh (Jayanta Kumar Biswas,J)