RAJ ENTERPRISE "VISHWA" Vs. TORRENT POWER AEC LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule. Though the endorsement on the board indicates that both the respondents are duly served, none of them has appeared either through its Lawyer, nor through its constituted agent nor any of them has filed reply controverting the averments made in the petition. Therefore, this Court is of the opinion that it is not necessary for the petitioner to effect service of notice of rule issued in this petition upon the respondents. Having regard to the facts of the case, the petition is taken up for final disposal today.

(2.) By filing this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, the petitioner has prayed to issue an appropriate writ or order directing the respondent No.1 i.e. Torrent Power (Ahmedabad Electricity Co.) Ltd. to grant five electric connections to the commercial Units constructed by him. The petitioner has further prayed to direct the respondent No.2 i.e. Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation to grant Building Use Permission to the commercial Units constructed by him.

(3.) From the record of the case it is evident that Final Plot No.286/5+6, T.P.Scheme No.3-Ellisbridge, Ahmedabad belonged to Hasmukh Shantilal Mehta, Nitin Shantilal Mehta and others. The owners of the land were desirous of developing the same. Therefore, they, through their Power of Attorney Holders Mr.Nitin Shantilal Mehta and Mr.Deepak Shantilal Mehta, applied to Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation to grant commencement-letter. The Commencement-Letter was granted by the Corporation on November 24, 2005, which is quite evident from the contents of document produced at Annexure-F to the petition. The owners of the land sold the same to Raj Enterprise, a partnership firm, for a sum of Rs.1 Crore & 90 Lakhs, which is quite clear from the contents of Village Form No.6, a copy of which is produced at Annexure-C to the petition. The petitioner i.e. Mr.Mahesh K.Savalia (Patel) is one of the partners of Raj Enterprise. As per the statement made by Mr.J.V.Mehta, learned Counsel for the petitioner, at the Bar, Mr.Mahesh K.Savalia (Patel) has constructed 49 commercial Units pursuant to the Commencement-Letter granted to the Power of Attorney Holders of original land-owners. After construction of the Units was over, it was the duty of the petitioner to obtain Building Use Permission and thereafter to approach the respondent No.1 for supply of electric connections to the Units constructed by him. However, without obtaining Building Use Permission, the petitioner applied to the respondent No.1 to grant five electric connections to the Units constructed by him. The said prayer has been turned down by the respondent No.1, which is quite evident from the contents of letter dated March 4, 2006 addressed by the General Manager of the respondent No.1 to the petitioner. A copy of the said letter is produced by the petitioner at Annexure-A to the petition. While refusing to grant five electric connections as prayed for by the petitioner, the respondent No.1 has informed the petitioner to produce either Building Use Permission or conditional order of the High Court to enable it to supply five electric connections to the Units constructed by the petitioner. Under the circumstances, the petitioner has filed the instant petition and claimed reliefs to which reference is made earlier.