DATE OF FILING : 19-02-2013. DATE OF S/R : 05-04-2013. DATE OF FINAL ORDER : 13-08-2013. Haradhan Sadhukhan, son of late Kalipada Sahdukhan, residing at village & P.O. & P.S. Joypur, District – Howrah, PIN – 711401. ------.-------------------------------------------------------- COMPLAINANT. - Versus - 1. Station Manager, WBSEDCL, Village & Post Office – Amoragori, District – Howrah, PIN – 711401. 2. Sri Judhisthir Jati, 3. Sri Arjun Jati, both sons of late Brajo Mohan Jati, residing at village – Joypur, Paschimpara, Post Office & P.S. Joypur, District – Howrah, PIN – 711401.-------------------------------------------------OPPOSITE PARTIES. P R E S E N T President : Shri T.K. Bhattacharya, M.A. LL.B. WBHJS. Member : Shri P.K. Chatterjee. Member : Smt. Jhumki Saha. F I N A L O R D E R 1. The instant case filed by complainant U/S 12 of the C.P. Act, 1986 as amended against O.P. no. 1 alleging deficiency in service U/S 2(1)(g), 2(1)(o) of the C .P. Act, 1986 wherein the complainant has prayed for direction upon the o.p. no. 1 for effecting new electric service connection through separate meter together with compensation and litigation costs as the O.P. no. 1 in spite of observing the necessary formalities including deposition of security deposit and service connection charges by the complainant, has been deferring the supply of electricity for want of free /easy access to the complainant premises. 2. The o.p. no. 1 i.e., WBSEDCL Authority in his written version admitted the facts regarding deposition of security deposit and service connection charges including execution of agreement etc. The O.P. no. 1 has given his best efforts to effect the new service connection to the complainant premises but could not be accelerated due to objection raised by the O.P. nos. 2 & 3, that the o.p. no. 1 i.e., WBSEDCL Authority is ready and willing to effect the new service connection if free access is available at the complainant premises with the assistance of civil authority. 3. The O.P. nos. 2 & 3 on the other hand through their written version stated that the passage enjoyed by the O.P. nos. 2 & 3 is not common with the complainant and the complainant has no right to use the same for the purpose of electricity. The present case so constituted is completely misconceived and the petitioner has been illegally trying to create right over the common passage. Moreover, the said passage / vacant land has been vested with this answering O.Ps. and thus the petitioner / complainant has no manner of right, title, interest over the schedule mentioned property and purported enormous norms and collusion with L.R. record of right cannot prevail over the adjudication made by the competent civil court for which the complaint is to be dismissed forthwith. 4. Upon pleadings of both parties two points arose for determination : i) Is there any deficiency in service on the part of the O.Ps. ? ii) Whether the complainant is entitled to get any relief as prayed for ? DECISION WITH REASONS : 5. Both the points are taken up together for consideration. Since the complainant deposited the quotational money against the security deposit and service connection charges under the head of new service connection to the WBSEDCL Authority and the O.P. no. 1 is willing to effect the new service connection, the objection raised by O.P nos. 2 & 3 cannot stand for effecting the proposed service connection in accordance of provision U/S 43 of the Electricity Act, 2003, as an occupier of the property or a part thereof, the petitioner has a statutory right to call upon the distribution company to give him electricity, and once the requisite application was filed, the distribution company incurred a statutory obligation to give him electricity simply because the petitioner is a party suffering from electricity, the private parties are not entitled to say that he cannot get electricity ( referring the case study – (2010) (3) WBLR (Cal) 539 before the Hon’ble High Court). Therefore, we are of the view that the complainant has a genuine demand and in view of the present position of law his demand requires to be fulfilled. Both the points are accordingly disposed of. In the result, the complaint succeeds. Hence, O R D E R E D That the C. C. Case No. 43 of 2013 ( HDF 43 of 2013 ) be allowed on contest without costs against the O.P. no. 1 and dismissed without cost against the O.P. nos. 2 & 3. The O.P. no. 1 , WBSEDCL Authority be directed to effect the service connection to the residence of the complainant as per schedule through common passage within 30 days from the date of this order giving top most priority. If there be any resistance by anyone including the O.P. nos. 2 & 3 against such supply of electricity in the said schedule premises, the O.P. no. 1 i.e., WBSEDCL Authority shall be at liberty to take necessary assistance or protection from Joypur P.S. The I/C, Joypur P.S. shall be under obligation to provide necessary assistance or protection to the men and officers of the WBSEDCL Authority for providing such supply to the complainant premises in case of approach made by WBSEDCL Authority . No costs is awarded in the nature of compensation and litigation. The complainant is at liberty to put the decree into execution after expiry of the appeal period. Supply the copies of the order to the parties, as per rule. DICTATED & CORRECTED BY ME. ( P. K. Chatterjee ) ( P. K. Chatterjee) Member, C.D.R.F.,Howrah. Member, C.D.R.F.,Howrah. ( T. K. Bhattacharya ) President, C.D.R.F.,Howrah. | 
