- (1.) THIS mandamus appeal is at the instance of the respondent in a writ application under Article 226 of the Constitution of india and is directed against the order dated June 11, 2003 passed by a learned single Judge of this Court by which His Lordship disposed of the writ application filed by the respondent before us by quashing the quotation dated October 3, 2002 being Annexure P-4 to the writ application with further direction upon the appellants to issue fresh quotation to the respondent without demanding any amount towards the cost of the transformer and other sub-station equipments within two weeks from the date of communication of such order.
(2.) THE facts giving rise to filing to the writ application may be summed upthus: (a) The writ petitioner with an intention to get electrical connection for running his submersible pump set fitted with a shallow tube-well obtained necessary clearance certificate from the Senior Geologist, Geological division-II, Suri, attached to the State Geological Directorate on February 6, 1998. (b) Thereafter temporary electric connection was given to the petitioner after the payment of the amount demanded by the West Bengal State electricity Board. The petitioner subsequently applied for permanent connection for effective irrigation of his land as well as the neighbouring lands. (c) As the State Electricity Board took no step for giving permanent connection, he, in the past, filed another writ application alleging inaction on the part of the Board when a learned Judge of this Court disposed of such application by directing the Board to consider such application in accordance with law within a specified period. (d) Pursuant to such order passed by this Court in the past, the Board gave a quotation for depositing a sum of Rs. 61,859/- being the amount including the costs of the transformer. According to the writ petitioner, such cost of transformer is to be borne by the Board and not by the consumer.
(3.) THE learned Single Judge by the order impugned herein has accepted the contention of the writ petitioner and has held that the transformer is a part of the transmission system and as such, the consumer is not obliged to pay the cost of such transformer. In arriving at such conclusion, His Lordship relied upon the two decisions of this Court passed in the year 2000 and 2002 respectively.;