- (1.) R. K. Agrawal, J. By means of the present writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner, Pawan Kumar Agarwal, seeks the following reliefs : (a) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the condition No. 3 in the order dated 6. 7. 2007, passed by the respondent No. 3 (Annexure-3) to the writ petition ; (b) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents, to provide the electricity connection in accordance with the U. P. Electricity Supply Code from the 33 K. V. Fatehpur Feeder and do not insist the petitioner to get the said connection from an independent feeder, i. e. , 133/33 K. V. Sub Station, Malwan, Fatehpur ; (c) Issue any other and further order which this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper under the circumstances of the case ; and (d) To award cost of the petition to the petitioner. "
(2.) BRIEFLY stated, the facts giving rise to the present petition are as follows : According to the petitioner, he proposed to set up an industry for the purpose of weaving and dying textiles in the name and style of M/s. Luxmi Cotsyn Ltd. . at Malwan, district Fatehpur. For running the unit, the petitioner applied for a new electricity connection on 31. 10. 2006 for a total load of 3000 K. V. A. Vide letter dated 6. 7. 2007, it was stipulated in condition No. 3 by the Chief Engineer (Commercial), Purvanchal Vidyut Vitran Nigarn Limited, Varanasi (hereinafter referred to as "the Nigam") that the electricity connection can be given from an independent feeder for which the expenses have to be borne by the petitioner. The expenditure for getting the aforesaid connection from an independent feeder would come to a whopping sum of Rs. 19 lacs. Relying upon Clause 3. 4 of the U. P. Electricity Supply Code, 2005 (hereinafter referred to as "the Code"), which deals with the supply through independent feeder, the petitioner requested the authorities to grant electricity connection from 33 K. V. , Fatehpur feeder and not from an independent feeder. When the request was not acceded, the petitioner approached this Court by filing the present writ petition. A supplementary-affidavit was filed by the petitioner stating that M/s. Shyam Ferrous Ltd. , Malwa which was granted 3000 K. V. A. load electricity connection for induction furnace from 33 K. V. , Fatehpur feeder, had been permanently disconnected vide ceiling certificate dated 1. 8. 2006 and at that place no electricity connection has been given to any other consumer. It was further stated that the Committee of the Nigam, after considering the relevant facts, found that the electricity connection sought by the petitioner is technically feasible and can be given from the Fatehpur feeder. A counter-affidavit has been filed by Sri P. Ram, Executive Engineer, on behalf of the respondent Nos. 2 and 3. It was stated that the power theft is rampant in the State and release of power supply through the mixed feeder from which a number of industries had already been given connection, to the consumer of higher load is also a cause for power theft and therefore, a policy decision was taken that contracted load of more than 1000 K. V. would be provided through an independent feeder by making a provision in Clause 3. 4 of the Code. It was stated that the said clause was applicable to other industries also other than those mentioned in the said clause, and, therefore, the condition of giving the electricity connection from the independent feeder was in accordance with the said clause. It was stated that the cost of providing the connection from the independent feeder is not relevant and as per Clause 3. 4 electricity connection of more than 1000 K. V. A. had to be given through the independent feeder.
(3.) IN rejoinder, the petitioner averred that in case of a higher load consumer, dual meter is installed under the exclusive control of the Nigam to check power theft. It was further stated that some steel plants having higher load than 1000 K. V. A. , have been granted electricity connection from the mixed feeder and as such the action of the respondents is discriminatory. As the counter-affidavit and rejoinder-affidavit have been exchanged between the parties, with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties, the writ petition is being finally heard and decided at the admission stage itself in accordance with the Rules of Court.;