BIJAY KUMAR TANTIA Vs. JHARKHAND STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A very short and simple point is involved for consideration and determination in this appeal. The appellant - Writ Petitioner applied for a fresh electricity connection in his status as a tenant of the premises situated on Holding No. 1866(A). Ward No. 20 at Ranchi but he was not granted the electricity connection on the ground that an earlier consumer owed some amount of money to the Board with respect to the aforesaid premises. The Board also informed the appellant -Writ Petitioner that electricity connection could be granted to him if he cleared the aforesaid outstanding dues of the erstwhile occupier/ consumer. Feeling aggrieved, the appellant -Writ Petitioner filed a writ application for appropriate relief, but the learned single Judge vide the judgment dated 22nd March, 2002 (under challenge in this appeal) and in the facts and circumstances of the case, declined to grant any relief to the appellant in the sense that he observed that if any amount was lying due with respect to the aforesaid property and if the same was deposited either by the appellant or by some one else, the Board shall grant electricity connection to the appellant in the aforesaid premises. The learned single Judge, therefore, made the condition of deposit of the outstanding dues of the earlier consumer as a sine qua non for the grant of new connection to the Appellant. Feeling aggrieved the Appellant -Writ Petitioner has come up in this appeal before us against the aforesaid judgment.

(2.) THERE are cases, where an erstwhile consumer, after committing defaults in the payment of electricity dues disappears or vanishes and sets up another individual or another juristic person and this newly set up individual or juristic person applies for a fresh electricity connection, pretending or showing that he has nothing do with the earlier occupier/consumer. In such cases, it is permissible for the Board, if either prima facie or upon an inquiry or investigation, the Board does find that the applicant for the fresh connection is none else but the reincarnation of the erstwhile occupier/consumer and that he has been set up by the erstwhile consumer only because there is a clear intention of not clearing the outstanding dues. Such permissibility however will not be applicable to a bona fide new applicant for a fresh electricity connection, who admittedly has had nothing to do with the erstwhile consumer. We are saying so because in law as well as based on established norms the liability to pay the electricity consumption charges is upon a consumer. The definition of the word 'consumer' can be found in Sec. 2(c) of the Indian Electricity Act, 1910 and the same reads as follows :

(3.) THE provision for the sale of electricity by the Board to persons other than licensee is to be found in Sec. 49 of the Electricity (Supply) Act, 1948 which reads as follows :