DATE OF FILING                    :           17-10-2012.

DATE OF S/R                            :         23-11-2012.

DATE OF FINAL ORDER      :           12-04-2013.

Rajesh Prasad,

son of late Hiralal Prasad,

of 17, Ramdhan Ghosh Lane,

Flat no. 2 ( ground floor ), P.O. Ghusuri,

P.S. Bally, District – Howrah,

PIN – 711107. ------------------------------------------------------------------- COMPLAINANT.

Versus   -

The CESC Ltd.,

Howrah Regional Office,

433/1, G.T. Road ( N ), P.S. Golabari,

District – Howrah,

PIN  – 711101.

The District Engineer,

The CESC Ltd. 433/1, G.T.  Road ( N ),

P.S. Golabari, District – Howrah,

PIN – 711101.-----------------------------------------------------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

The instant case was filed by complainant U/S 12 of the C.P. Act, 1986 as amended against the O.Ps. alleging deficiency in service U/S 2(1)g), 2(1)(o) of the C.P. Act, 1986 wherein the complainant has  prayed for passing necessary directions upon the o.ps. to provide power supply ( loop connection) together with  compensation and litigation costs as the o.ps. in spite of observing the necessary formalities including deposition of MASD Bills by the complainant has been deferring the supply of electricity for want of free access at the complainant schedule tenanted premises / meter room and for further order for police help if any obstruction or disturbance is caused by the other third party.  

The O.Ps. CESC Authority in their  written version admitted that the complainant complied with all formalities and paid the MASD Bill but the meter cannot be installed owing to the objection raised by so called landlord and the said land owner is enjoying permanent injunction against the complainant vide Civil Suit Case No.  T.S. 67 of 2011 before the 1^st Civil Judge ( Jr. Division ) and final disposal of the said proceedings is still pending.

Upon pleadings of both parties two points arose for determination : -

Is there any deficiency in service on the part of the O.Ps.  ?

Whether the complainant is   entitled to get any relief as prayed for ? 

DECISION  WITH   REASONS

                                Both the points are  taken up together for consideration. The complainant complied

with all necessary formalities. It appears that the O.Ps. being public utility concern is eager to cater supply to the intending consumer i.e., complainant. There is no deficiency in service on their part and nor did they commit any unfair trade practice. Their inability to install the meter was due to the objection raised by  the 3^rd party i.e. landlord / owner. Since the complainant being a tenant is suffered for want of electricity and the O.Ps. are willing to install the  electric meter ( loop ), the objection raised  by the landlord  cannot sustain at this critical juncture as per the Electricity Act (36 of 2003), Sec.-43, 167, 67-works of Licensees’ Rule, 2006 which runs as under,--

“Persons in settled possession of property be it tracepassers, unauthorized encroachment, squatter of any premises can apply for supply of electricity without the consent of the owner- is entitled to get electricity and enjoy the same until he is evicted by due process of law” (reference WB No. 423 of 2010, date 11/02/2011 before the Hon’ble High Court, Registered under AIR 2011 Cal P-64.

                                From the above we have our considered opinion that under Electricity Act, 2003, occupier has a statutory right, and licensee as distribution company has a statutory obligation to give  electric connection to occupier – Pendency of suit with the private respondents with interim injunction against the petitioner, the electric connection cannot change nature and character of the property. 

                                Therefore, we are of the view that the complainant has a genuine demand and in view of the present position of law as elaborated, 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. 147 of 2012 ( HDF 147 of 2012 )  be  and the same is allowed on contest without cost against O.Ps.

                                The O.Ps. CESC Authority be directed to install a new meter (loop) at the schedule premises meant for power supply  to the complainant at the existing meter room.

                                If thereby any resistance by anyone including the landlord / lady against installation of meter of the said premises O.Ps. CESC Ltd. shall be at liberty to take necessary assistance or protection from the Bally P.S. The I/C Bally P.S. shall be under obligation to provide necessary assistance or protection to the men and officers of the CESC Ltd. for providing supply to the complainant in case of approach made by the CESC Ltd. For which a sum of Rs.11,770/- has been deposited by the complainant through challan dated 17/05/2012 against engagement of police escort as advised by the Commissionerate of Howrah.

                                No costs both compensation and litigation are awarded.

                                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.