Disposed

Rehana Bibi @ Rehana Bibi Sk. v. Cesc Ltd. and Ors.

Calcutta HC1 Sept 2023WPA/13257/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Single Judge in this writ petition acknowledged a variances discrepancy between addresses but disposed of the petition granting liberty to apply for a fresh electricity connection after clearing arrears.

What did the court decide?

Liberty granted to petitioner to apply for a fresh electricity connection at the intended location upon payment of all arrear and connection charges, with supply to be given within three weeks of comp

Rehana Bibi @ Rehana Bibi Sk. Vs Cesc Ltd. and Ors. — Service and Employment | Calcutta HC (2023)

¶1

D/L. 33. September 1, 2023. MNS.

¶2

WPA No. 13257 of 2023

¶3

Rehana Bibi @ Rehana Bibi Sk Vs. CESC Limited and others

¶4

Mr. Bidyut Kumar Halder, Mr. Indranil Halder

¶5

… for the petitioner.

¶6

Ms. A. Rao, Ms. A. Basu

¶7

…for the CESC Limited.

¶8

Affidavit-of-service filed in Court today be kept on record.

¶9

Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner has paid all dues and the CESC Limited also installed electricity connection at the behest of the petitioner, but at a different premise than that of the petitioner.

¶10

As such, the instant writ petition is necessitated.

¶11

Learned counsel appearing for the CESC Limited hands over a copy of an electricity bill and submits that the address at which the bill was raised and, obviously, the connection was

¶12

¶13

given, is the same as that of the petitioner disclosed in the writ petition. It is submitted that the petitioner failed to pay the electricity charges and subsequently, as a result, the supply has been disconnected. As such, the present writ petition ought to be dismissed.

¶14

A comparison between the electricity bill handed over in court today, which is kept on record, and the cause title of the writ petition indicates that there is a subtle difference between the two addresses, insofar as the bill discloses the address of the petitioner as “Chatta Kalikapur (Maheshtala), LP-9/59, Kolkata 700 140”, whereas the cause title of the present writ petition depicts the address as “Uttar Karbala (Dakshin Ansh), Chatta Kalikapur, Mahestala, P.S.Mahestala, Kolkata- 700 140”.

¶15

However, it is seen in the present case that the electricity connection was given in February 2, 2023, whereas the petitioner filed the writ petition only in the month of May, 2023, that apart, after disconnection of such supply.

¶16

Even without going into the allegation of the petitioner that the meter has been installed

¶17

¶18

somewhere else, since the petitioner paid for the electricity charges for the same, it cannot be said that the CESC Limited installed the same at a different address than that applied by the petitioner.

¶19

Be that is it may, learned counsel for the petitioner submits, on instruction, that the petitioner is agreeable to apply for shifting of the existing connection, alternatively a fresh connection for electricity supply to her premises and shall also pay all the due and arrear charges to the CESC Limited.

¶20

In view of such fair stand taken by the petitioner, WPA No. 13257 of 2023 is disposed of by granting liberty to the petitioner to apply for a fresh electricity connection to the proper location as sought by the petitioner. Upon such application being made and all arrear charges being paid regarding the previous connection of the petitioner, as well as payment of all charges for fresh connection being paid and upon compliance of all due formalities by the petitioner, the CESC Limited shall give a new connection to the petitioner at his intended location at the earliest, preferably

¶21

¶22

within three weeks from compliance of all formalities by the petitioner.

¶23

There will be no order as to costs.

¶24

Urgent photostat certified copies of this order, if applied for, be made available to the parties upon compliance with the requisite formalities.

¶25

(Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya, J.)

Rehana Bibi @ Rehana Bibi Sk. v. Cesc Ltd. and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rehana Bibi @ Rehana Bibi Sk. v. Cesc Ltd. and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Lokesh Kumar and Ors. Vs Ministry of Railways and Ors.

Radhashyam Mahapatra Vs State of West Bengal and Ors.

Tushar Kanti Das Vs State of West Bengal and Ors.

Om Prakash Gupta Vs K Srinivasan Transport Commissioner Cum Secretary and Ors.

Subrata Sarkar Alias Gupi Sarkar Vs Jageswar Devi Das

Biswajit Ghosh Vs Cesc Ltd. and Ors.