PROTIK PRAKASH BANERJEE,J. - (1.) Pursuant to my earlier direction the Distribution Licensee is represented. Mr. Roychowdhury's learned advocate on record files an affidavit of service which is kept on record.
(2.) The writ petitioner had approached the Court because his son had been electrocuted while visiting a roadside tea stall in the rural area near Diamond Harbour where electrification is done by the West Bengal State Electricity Distribution Company Limited as a distribution licensee under the Electricity Act, 2003. Though the questions of compensation and constitutional tort have arisen during the course of hearing of the writ petition I wanted to ascertain from the Distribution Licensee whether indeed there was electrocution as is apparent from the post mortem report.
(3.) Learned advocate for the Distribution Licensee submits that the fault was not of the Distribution Licensee but it was wholly that of the non-State respondent who was running the tea stall where electric supply was obtained by 'hooking' from a supply of the electricity effected by the Distribution Licensee which did not stand in the name of the non-State respondent. It is his submission on instructions that the petitioner's son went to have tea and biscuits at such roadside stall and was electrocuted.;