Petitioner challenged denial of power connection due to alleged arrears in her late father's name. Court found no evidence of connection in father's name and directed supply.
Impugned order set aside; Opposite Parties directed to provide power connection within 15 days without insisting on payment of alleged arrears.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed Signed by: MADHUSMITA SAHOO Designation: Senior Stenographer Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack Date: 23-Nov-2023 12:19:14
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
W.P.(C) No. 19970 OF 2022 Minakumari Baral ….
…. Petitioner
Mr. Hrudananda Mohapatra, Advocate
-versus-
State of Odisha and others
…. Opp. Parties
Mr. Debendra Kumar Mohanty, Additional Standing Counsel (For Opp. Party No.1) Mr. Ajaya Kumar Dash, Advocate (For Opp. Party Nos.2 to 5)
CORAM:
JUSTICE K.R. MOHAPATRA
ORDER
Order No.
22.11.2023
Page 1 of 4
Signature Not Verified
// 2 //
Digitally Signed Signed by: MADHUSMITA SAHOO Designation: Senior Stenographer Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack Date: 23-Nov-2023 12:19:14
n amely, Hari Baral. The Executive Engineer, (Elect.), TPCODL, Khurda-Opposite Party No.3 rejected the request of the Petitioner in view of the provision under Regulation 17(i) of the OERC Distribution (Conditions of supply) Code, 2019 (for short ‘the Code’). Regulation 17(i) reads as under:
“17. (i) If the applicant in respect of an earlier agreement executed in his/her name or in the name of his spouse, son, daughter, parents or in the name of a firm or company with which he/she was associated either as a partner, director or managing director, is in arrears of electricity dues or other dues for the same premises or his/her other premises situated in the same DISCOM or any other DISCOM in the State, the application for supply shall not be allowed by the engineer until the arrears are settled and paid in full.”
Page 2 of 4
Signature Not Verified
// 3 //
Digitally Signed Signed by: MADHUSMITA SAHOO Designation: Senior Stenographer Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack Date: 23-Nov-2023 12:19:14
d irected him to submit documents along with an additional affidavit of a competent officer justifying their action. Accordingly, an additional affidavit was filed by Opposite Party Nos.2 to 5 on 4th July, 2023. In the said affidavit, it is stated that power connection to the said premises was made in the name of Hari Baral, the father of the Petitioner. After his death on 10th January, 1980, his only daughter, namely, the Petitioner was enjoying the power supply till December, 2021. The arrear outstanding against Hari Baral is Rs.2,61,845.00. Since the same remained unpaid, fresh connection to the said premises could not considered. In support of such contention, a ledger (AnnexureC/3) in respect of aforesaid consumer number is filed. No other document is available on record to show that there was a power connection in the name of the Late Hari Baral. The ledger at Annexure-C/3 relates to the month of March, 2005 onwards. Admittedly, Hari Baral has died since 1980 and the ledger at Annexure-C/3 relates to a period subsequent thereto.
Page 3 of 4
Signature Not Verified
// 4 //
Digitally Signed Signed by: MADHUSMITA SAHOO Designation: Senior Stenographer Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack Date: 23-Nov-2023 12:19:14
a s an occupier of the premises is also entitled to power connection in view of Section 43 of the Odisha Electricity Act, 2003. Further the application of the Petitioner to provide power supply was not rejected on the said ground. Power connection to the premises was refused on the ground that there was an outstanding electricity bill against the father of the Petitioner. Since there is no material on record to come to a definite conclusion that, in fact, there was power connection in the name of said Hari Baral before his death, the submission of Mr. Dash, learned counsel for the TPCODL basing upon the ledger at Annexure-C/3 cannot be accepted.
Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper application.
(K.R. Mohapatra) Judge
ms
Page 4 of 4
2 issues framed by the court
Whether power connection can be denied due to alleged arrears in the name of the predecessor.
Whether the respondent could establish that electricity was supplied to the deceased father.
3 provisions across 2 enactments
Minakumari Baral
State of Odisha
Executive Engineer, (Elect.), KED, Khurda
TPCODL, Khurda
Hari Baral
K.R. Mohapatra
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
