Smti.S.Hymawathi Vs the Superintending Engineer and Ors. — Calcutta HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Smti.S.Hymawathi Vs the Superintending Engineer and Ors. — Calcutta HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner is entitled to grant of an electricity connection in respect of the structure at Survey No.177, Nanjappa Nagar, Little Andaman, given the factual dispute over her residence and possession and the respondents' stand that she already enjoys a connection at her husband's meter.

Court's answer

The prayer for grant of electricity in respect of the structure on the said plot cannot be allowed, since the plot contains only a dilapidated, locked tin shed with no sign of domestic activity and the petitioner is not in possession of it.

Key takeaways

If in future the petitioner makes any construction on the said plot and resides therein, she may file a separate application in the prescribed format, which shall be processed in accordance with law.obiter¶¶20

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ petition (WPA/343/2025) by Smti. S. Hymawathi against the Superintending Engineer and Others seeking electricity connection for a structure at Survey No.177, Nanjappa Nagar, Little Andaman — dismissed. The Court had directed inspections to ascertain the nature of the construction and its purpose of use; the respondents' case in the affidavit-in-opposition was that the petitioner already enjoys a connection from the meter allotted to her husband, and that her husband, the recorded tenant of Survey Plot No. 145/7/19/2 at Haddo village, had already been provided with electricity. The petitioner's reply was that her husband had passed away and she wished to reside at the Survey No.177 premises. The further inspection revealed only a dilapidated tin shed, locked, with no sign of domestic activity, and the petitioner was not in possession. The prayer for grant of electricity was therefore refused. Liberty was granted to the petitioner to file a separate application in the prescribed format if she in future constructs on the plot and resides therein, to be processed in accordance with law. (Shampa Sarkar, J.; High Court at Calcutta, Circuit Bench at Port Blair; November 7, 2025.)

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA

[CIRCUIT BENCH AT PORT BLAIR]

WPA/343/2025

Smti. S. Hymawathi

Vs

The Superintending Engineer and Others

Mr. R.Sanat … for the petitioner Mr. S.C. Mishra … for the respondents

November 7, 2025 [SR] Item No.1

Several inspections were held, upon directions of this Court. The authorities were asked to ascertain the exact nature of the construction and the purpose of use of the same.

In the affidavit-in-opposition, the specific case of the respondents is that, the petitioner already enjoys connection from the meter allotted to her husband in another place and as such two connections cannot be given.

It is the specific case of the petitioner that she does not reside at the place in which the connection had been given to her husband.

The contentions of the respondents is that, the petitioner’s husband was the recorded tenant of Survey Plot No. 145/7/19/2 situated at Haddo village, who had been already provided with electricity. The petitioner was residing with her husband in the said plot.

To the affidavit-in-opposition filed by the authorities, a reply has been filed by the petitioner, inter alia, stating that the petitioner’s husband had passed away and the petitioner wishes

2

to reside in the premises bearing Survey No.177, measuring an area of 200 square meters at Nanjappa Nagar, Little Andaman.

In view of the factual disputes, the Court had directed further inspection. The photographs of the inspection have been filed. It appears that a dilapidated tin shed stands on the said plot, which is locked. There is no sign of any domestic activity in an around the shed. The petitioner is not in possession of the same.

Under such circumstances, the prayer for grant of electricity in respect of the said structure cannot be allowed by the Court.

The writ petition is dismissed.

If, in future, the petitioner makes any construction on the said plot and resides therein, the petitioner may file a separate application in the prescribed format, which shall be processed in accordance with law.

Parties to act in terms of the server copy of this order downloaded from the website of this Hon’ble Court.

(Shampa Sarkar, J.)