- (1.) The petitioner in this WP under art.226 is alleging that though he is entitled to supply of electricity to the premises in question, the licensee is not giving him supply breaking and removing the wrongful resistence put up by the private respondents. The question is whether the licensee has failed and neglected in the discharge of its statutory duty.
(2.) The provisions of s.43 of the Electricity Act, 2003 have created a statutory duty of the licensee to give supply of electricity to an applicant who is an occupier of the premises where the supply is sought. But no law empowers the licensee to break and remove any resistence put up by a person claiming right over a property that is sought to be used for giving supply to the applicant.
(3.) Here the petitioner wants to take supply to his premises through a place use of which for the purpose is objected to by the private respondents. The petitioners right to use the place cannot be decided by the licensee. Hence I am unable to accept that the licensee has failed in the discharge of its statutory duty created by s.43 of the Act. In my opinion, the petitioner's remedy, if any, was before the Civil and Criminal Courts. He was also free to examine the question of initiating summary proceedings under s.147 CrPC for establishing his right to use the place for taking supply of electricity to his premises. I do not find any reason to decide the question under art.226. The question has arisen out of a private dispute between the petitioner and the private respondents. In the name of failure in the discharge of s.43 statutory duty on the part of the licensee power under art.226 cannot be exercised for adjudicating a private dispute.;