BHARATKUMAR THAKORDAS MANJARWALA Vs. GUJARAT ELECTRICITY BOARD BARODA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners are occupying some land and buildings constructed thereon in the sim of village Vadod which is situated within urban agglomeration area of Surat. The petitioners appear to have installed powerlooms in such buildings. The petitioners pray that the respondent Electricity Board be directed to give electricity connection to them. It is contended that they have put up construction on the land owned and occupied by them after obtaining necessary permission from the Gram Panchayat concerned. Moreover the owners and occupiers of plot No.1 of the same survey number and plot No. 5 of survey No. 19 are also given electricity connection by the Board. They are similarly situated and therefore the Board being State cannot deny the equal treatment to the petitioners.

(2.) It is made clear in the affidavit-in-reply filed on behalf of the Board that as far as the owners and occupiers of plot No. 1 of the same survey number and that of plot no. 5 of survey no. 99 are concerned the Board is contemplating course of action to be adopted by it in such cases. The argument that because some other persons are given connections unlawfully or in contravention of the policy of the Government and the Board, the same course should be adopted by the Board cannot be accepted. No one has a right to claim equal benefit which flows from unlawful action. Article does not give right to claim equal benefits from unlawful and illegal actions. At any Rate the turn exercising the powers under Art. 226 of the Constitution of India would not and ordinarily should no. entertain such claims and grant reliefs on such basis. Art. 14 of the Constitution of India guarantees equality before law and equal protection of law. It does not guarantee equality for the wrongful benefits or extension of equal protection granted illegally the Courts are meant to enforce law and are not meant to perpetuate and permeate contravention of laws. If this is done Courts will cease to be all instrument of enforcing rule of law and will become an instrument of enforcing and extending illegalities. At least this is not the object of Art. 14 of the Constitution of India No one can claim fundamental right to be benefited wrongly and in unlawful manner. Even if one may claim Court exercising power under Art. 226 of the Constitution of India in its discretion would never extend its hand of help in favour of illegalities.

(3.) It is next contended that the petitioners have made payment to the Board on 20/02/1985 while the Board received objection from the Government on 28/02/1985. The Government directed the Board that whenever local authority has submitted timely objections with regard to the nature of construction and the user of the land the electricity connection should not be given. It. is submitted on behalf of the electricity that in the instant case since the payment was received by the Board prior to the date of issuance of directions by the Government and that the objections were received from the District Panchayat Surat some time in March 1985 it cannot be said that there was timely objection from the local authority. The argument cannot be accepted. Timely objection in the context would mean any time before the grant of electricity connections not any time before the acceptance of deposit amount. Hence this contention has also got to be rejected.