Poonam Srivastav, J. - (1.) THE instant writ is for a direction to the respondent no. 4 to provide new domestic electric connection to the petitioner without insisting for payment of dues in respect of the connection provided to the erstwhile consumer.
(2.) LEARNED Counsel has placed reliance on the decisions of this Court in the case of Jagannath Singh v. Jharkhand State Electricity Board, 2002 (1) JCR 221 (Jhr) and also in the case of Smt. Urmila Devi v. Jharkhand State Electricity Board, Ranchi and Ors. 2010 (4) JLJR 418. In both the decisions it was held that the electric connection cannot be refused merely on the ground that some dues is pending against erstwhile owner of the building or there is a dispute concerning right, title and interest over house in question and the same is sub -judice before Civil Court. The Board was directed to extend the electric connection on the portion of the house in occupation of the petitioner. In view of the aforesaid two decisions learned Counsel has made a prayer that the respondents be directed to grant fresh electric connection in the name of the petitioner for the portion in her occupation.
(3.) ANNEXURE -6 is an order, whereby the Assistant Electrical Engineer has written to the concerned authority that, in fact, no document has been produced by the applicant in support of her rightful occupation for supply of fresh electric connection regarding the building in which fresh connection is sought for.;