IN RE: JAHAR LAL MITRA Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL
HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
In Re: Jahar Lal Mitra
STATE OF WEST BENGAL
Click here to view full judgement.
HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA,J. -
(1.) Mr. Vibekananda Bose Mr. Indrajit Dey For the Petitioner Mr. Raja Saha, Mr. Subrata Dasgupta For the State Mr. Biswajit Dirghangi, Mr. Nishith Mukherjee Ms. Baisakhi Nag Chowdhury Authorised representative of CESC Limited The petitioner has filed the instant writ petition praying for supply of electricity by installing a meter in his name at premises no.10, Siddheswar Chandra Lane, Kolkata- 700012. The petitioner claims to be a tenant in respect of the property in question. It has been specifically stated in the writ petition that the petitioner was enjoying supply of electricity in his tenanted room from the electricity meter standing in the name of the landlady upon payment of charges to the landlady for consumption of electricity. The landlady failed to make payments of the previous electricity bills. As a result of which, the CESC authorities had disconnected the electric connection at premises no.10, Siddheswar Chandra Lane, Kolkata-700012. Since the petitioner is without electricity, he has applied for new connection through a meter installed at the premises before the electricity authorities.
(2.) Mr. Dirghangi, learned advocate appears on behalf of the respondent nos. 7 to 9 and submits that the petitioner is not a tenant in respect of the property in question and he is in unlawful occupation of the premises in question. As such the petitioner is not entitled to take supply of electricity in his own name through installation of a meter.
(3.) A copy of the writ petition has been served upon CESC authorities and Ms. Baisakhi Nag Chowdhury, a representative of CESC Limited is present in Court and has appeared in this matter on behalf of the CESC authorities. She has also submitted an authorisation given by the Company in her favour to appear in the matter. She submits that the men and agents of the CESC Limited went to the premises in question on May 23, 2019 for an inspection to be carried out but were prevented by the respondent nos.7 to 9 from undertaking such inspection. She further submits that the petitioner was enjoying supply of electricity through a meter standing in the name of Ms. Sailaja Nanda Mukherjee and the said meter was disconnected due to non-payment of electricity charges. A sum of Rs. 11,227.67/- is lying as outstanding on account of electricity charges after adjustment of the security deposit in respect of the said disconnected meter. The said authorised representative submits that the electricity supply can only be effected to the petitioner only if the petitioner is agreeable to pay the said outstanding amount of Rs. 11,227.67/-.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.