ANJALI METIA Vs. WEST BENGAL STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is against an order by the learned Single Judge who, while disposing of the writ petition directed the West Bengal State Electricity Board to supply the electricity at the portion of the premises under the occupation of the petitioner. The petitioner had come up before this Court on the ground that though he had applied for the electric connection in respect of the house which he had occupied, he was not being granted that connection by the Board.

(2.) The learned Judge has simply directed the Board to supply the connection and has made further observation that the supply of electricity to the petitioner would not create any right in favour of the petitioner nor would it be to the prejudice and interest of the private respondents. It is to be seen that hi this writ petition, the petitioner's mother and two married sisters are joined as respondents because they had raised an objection to the grant of electricity connection.

(3.) The petitioner is the son of one Aditya Ranjan Biswas. He has one brother and two married sisters, viz., Bijoli Manna and Anjali Metia. His mother Atashi Rani Biswas is still living. What transpires from the affidavit - in-opposition which was filed before the learned Judge as also from the other documents is that the father of the petitioner Aditya Ranjan Biswas died and before that he was living in a house which was constructed somewhere in the year 1961. The petitioner claimed that this house was constructed from the income of his father, but his father showed the same to be in the name of his mother. In short his plea was that his mother was a benamidar. He contended that before the death of his father he had left the house for four years which fact he has stated in his letter to the Board. He further pleaded that after the death of the father he came back to the house. Now it transpires from the fact pleaded in the petition and also in the affidavit-in-opposition that the mother had gifted this house in favour of her two daughters, the respondents herein and that throughout it is only those two married sisters who looked after the mother. The mother seems to have gifted this house on 6th September, 1994 after the death of the father of the petitioner and, thereafter, the two sisters and the mother were residing in the house. There is a report on the record made to the police that after the death of the father while the three ladies were residing, the petitioner forced his entry into the house and started occupying the portion of the house. On that basis there appears to be an entry in the general diary of the police station. There also appears on record an order dated 7th April, 2005 passed by the Executive Magistrate, Barrackpore in M.P. No. 888 of 2005 which proceeding appears to have been instituted on the basis of the petition filed by Smt. Bijoli Manna, one of the appellants herein and the respondent in the writ petition. By this order the Executive Magistrate seems to have exercised his powers under section 144(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure and ordered status quo. It appears that the grant of electric connection was objected to by the private respondents as the existing meter to the concerned house was transferred in the name of Smt. Bijoli Manna. It also appears further that earlier this connection was in the name of the mother and with her consent the connection was transferred. It also further transpires that Smt. Bijoli Manna had paid all the electricity charges including the arrears and, thereafter, had applied to the Board for temporary disconnection. When the petitioner applied in 2004 for fresh connection, the house did not have any supply of electricity as on account of the request made by Smt. Bijoli Manna, the meter supply was disconnected.