RAD TRADE PRIVATE LIMITED Vs. CESC LIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In the instant writ petition it has been contended on behalf of the writ petitioner no. 1 M/s. Rad Trade Private Limited that the writ petitioner no. 2 Anshuman Damani is the director of the said private limited company having its unit for bottle washing plant at 60J, J. N. Lahiri Road, Sreampore, District Hooghly. It is further contended that the said unit was set up after a Memorandum of Understanding was entered into with Shri Sitansu Lahiri, owner of the said premises on or about 9th day of November, 2008. The petitioner claimed that they are occupying the said factory premises as tenant under the said Sitansu Lahiri and running the business with 30 employees with the help of Generator Set for want of electricity. It is further contended that on or about 15th December, 2008 the writ petitioners applied for new electric connection at the aforesaid premises for commercial purpose. But the District Engineer, Sreerampore District communicated their decision through letter dated 15th December, 2008 intimating that there was some outstanding dues in respect of consumption of electricity at the aforesaid premises and so he was asked to contact the outstanding section of commercial department, Howrah Regional Office. Accordingly he contacted the commercial department while they handed over two outstanding bills in the name of Sreampore Rubber Products for the month of November, 1998 for a sum of Rs. 1,416/- and another bill for the month of December, 1998 for a sum of Rs. 60,679/- and demanded that unless the said outstanding amount is paid by the petitioner no. 1, the respondents will not provide any new electricity connection in the said premises.

(2.) It is further case of the petitioners that under Section 43 of the Electricity Act, 2003 it is incumbent upon the respondents to supply electricity on application by the owner or occupier of any premises within one month from the date of receipt of such application and since no electricity has been supplied to the writ petitioners, who are new applicants, they cannot be treated as consumer within the meaning of Section 2(15) of the Electricity Act, 2003 and therefore, there is no liability on the part of the petitioner to liquidate the arrears left over by the erstwhile owner of the premises. It is also contended that the petitioners have no connection with the said Sreampore Rubber Products and they are inducted as tenants in the said premises by a separate agreement. Outstanding dues can be recovered from a defaulter and not from any new applicant. Such demand is the outcome of arbitrary process of recovering the dues beyond jurisdiction. Therefore, by their illegal active refusal the respondents are trying to prevent the petitioners from carrying out their fundamental rights of business and from enjoying their right of livelihood in violation of constitutional provisions. Therefore, they have prayed for necessary direction upon the respondents to give new electric connection in the factory premises of the petitioners on 60J, J. N. Lahiri Road, Sreampore, District Hooghly immediately without insisting upon payment of the amount raised in the bills for November and December, 2008 in favour of Sreampore Rubber Products in any manner whatsoever and to cancel the decision of the respondents for such demand of outstanding dues of the previous consumer.

(3.) In their affidavit-in-opposition the respondent nos. 1 to 4 have claimed that as per their usual practice CESC issued a letter on 15.12.2008 calling upon the writ petitioners or its authorised representative to pay the outstanding dues and assured that after settlement of the recoverable dues they will take further steps to effect supply of electricity to the writ petitioners. They have further claimed that the said Sitansu Lahiri is the landlord of the said premises and he used to run the Sreampore Rubber Products in the same premises. Such supply was disconnected for theft of electricity on 23.07.1997 under LCC Ref. No. LCC/936/97 and a claim of Rs. 8,27,240/- was forwarded to the said Sreampore Rubber Products. The demand was challenged before this Hon'ble Court in the writ petition being W. P. No. 15355(W) of 1997 and this Hon'ble Court by order dated 07.08.1997 directed the said Sreampore Rubber Products to deposit 50 per cent of the total claim in two equal instalments. The consumer deposited 25 per cent i.e., Rs. 2,06,810/- on 18.08.1997 and the balance 25 per cent on 02.01.1998. Thereafter the supply of electricity was restored to the said Sreampore Rubber Products as per order of this Hon'ble Court.