RENU SURI Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Counsel for the parties. Undisputedly, the petitioner is daughter in law of Krishna Lal Suri. Petitioner, his father-in-law and other members are residing in different portions of one building. On account of family dispute regarding share and partition, the father-in-law disconnected the electrical energy supply to the petitioner's portion. Under these circumstances, the petitioner applied for electrical energy connection but the same is being denied to the petitioner.

(2.) On behalf of the respondent, it has been argued that the petitioner is neither the landlord nor the tenant and as such electrical energy connection cannot be given to her.

(3.) Having considered the submissions advanced by the parties, I am of the view that the respondents' cannot deny electrical energy connection to the petitioner when, admittedly, she is the daughter-in-law of Krishna Lal Suri and is residing in one portion of the same building. The Apex Court in Chandu Khamaru v. Smt. Nayan Malik and others,2011 4 SCCD 1705 (SC) has held that provisions of the Electricity Act, 2003 make it amply clear that a distribution licensee has a statutory duty to supply electricity to an owner or occupier of any premises located in the area of supply of electricity of the distribution licensee, if such owner or occupier of the premises applies for it. In the instant case, it is not disputed that the petitioner is occupying some portion of the same building of which family dispute regarding share is going on. Under these circumstances, this writ petition is disposed of finally with the direction to the opposite parties Nos. 4 and 5 to provide electrical energy connection to the petitioner without any further loss of time provided the formalities are completed by the petitioner within a week.