DATE OF FILING : 25/02/2014.
DATE OF S/R : 24/03/2014.
DATE OF FINAL ORDER : 29/08/2014.
SMT. MOLINA DHARA
w/o Sri Madhusudan Dhara,
3/2, Nag para Lane, P.S. Shibpur, Ground Floor,
represented by her constituted attorney
Madhusudhan Dhara Howrah.--------------------------------------------------COMPLAINANT.
- Versus -
1) The District Engineer, C.E.S.C. Ltd.
433/1, G.T. Road, (North),
Howrah 711 101
2) Manoj Manna,
S/3/2, Nag Para Lane,
P.S. Shibpur Howrah - 711 102
3) Smt. Dipali Manna.
w/o Sri Manoj Manna,
S/3/2, Nag Para Lane,
P.S. Shibpur, Howrah - 711 102
4) Aditi Manna,
d/o Sri Manoj Manna,
S/3/2, Nag Para Lane,
P.S. Shibpur, Howrah - 711 102 ------------------------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 was filed by complainant U/S 12 of the C.P. Act, 1986, as
amended against the O.P. No. 1 C.E.S.C. Ltd. 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 C.E.S.C. Ltd. to provide separate electric connection through installation of meter (loop ) at the schedule premises at 3/2, Nag Para Lane, P.S. Shibpur, District – Howrah, together with compensation and litigation costs as the O.P. No. 1 C.E.S.C. Ltd., in spite of observing the necessary formalities by the complainant including receiving EMD money has been deferring the supply of electricity for want of free access at the complainant schedule premise.
2. The brief facts of the case is that the complainant applied before the O.P. no. 1
C.E.S.C. Ltd. for a separate domestic meter supply at his occupied premises. Attempt for site inspection was made on 28-06-2013 but could not be accelerated due to objection raised by o.p. nos. 2 to 4. Hence the case.
3. The o.p. no. 1 in his written version contended interalia that they are ready to
effect the connection if free access is available at the complainant schedule premises.
4. The o.p. nos. 2 to 4 on the other hand vide their written version stated that a
Title Suit being no. 66 of is pending before the ld. 2nd Civil Judge ( Jr. Division ), Howrah, for eviction of trespassers against the complainant Malina Dhara for disposal for which she has no right, title, interest in the schedule premises where she wants to take connection in her name. These answering o.ps. further stated that the complainant deliberately and willfully suppressed the fact and as a matter in dispute is sub judice in the Civil Court, and Hon’ble Calcutta High Court, the complainant cannot get any relief and liable to be dismissed on cost.
5. 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 :
6. Both the points are taken up together for consideration. Since the complainant being a lawful occupier is suffered for want of electricity and the o.p. no. 1 is willing to install the electric meter but objection raised by o.p. nos. 2 to 4 cannot sustain at this critical juncture as per Electricity Act ( 36 of 2003 ), Ss 43, 176, 67 – Works of Licensee Rules ( 2006 ) which runs as under :
“Persons in settled possession of property be it trespasser, unauthorized encroacher squatter of any premises, can apply for supply electricity without consent of co-sharer – Is entitled to get electricity and enjoy same by due process of law.” [ Reference W.B. no. 423 of 2010, dated 11-02-2011 before the Hon’ble High Court registered AIR 2011 Cal P-64 ].
7. 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 other co-sharers 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. 100 of 2014 ( HDF 100 of 2014 ) be and the same is allowed on contest against o.p. no. 1 and dismissed against o.p. nos. 2 to 4 but without cost.
The O.P. No. 1 C.E.S.C. Ltd. . be directed to provide new connection through separate meter ( loop) at the schedule premises of the complainant after conducting site inspection with raising MASD Bill within 45 days from the date of this order giving top most priority.
The O.P. Nos. 2 to 4 are hereby restrained from causing any disturbance at the time of installation of meter at the schedule premises of the complainant. .
If thereby any resistance by anyone including the o.p. nos. 2 to 4 against effecting the service connection at the complainant schedule premises, the O.P. No. 1 C.E.S.C. Ltd.
shall be at liberty to take necessary assistance or protection from Shibpur P.S. The O/C Shibpur P.S. shall be under obligation to provide necessary assistance or protection to the men and officer of the O.P. No. 1 C.E.S.C. Ltd. for providing connection at the complainant schedule premises in case of approach made by the O.P. No. 1 C.E.S.C. Ltd.
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.
DICTATED & CORRECTED
BY ME.
( P. K. Chatterjee )
Member, C.D.R.F.,Howrah.
