IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.12568 of 2009 Date of Decision: 19.08.2009 Municipal Corporation, Chandigarh Petitioner Versus Permanent Lok Adalat (Public Utility Services), U.T. Chandigarh and another Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASBIR SINGH Present: Mr.Sanjiv Ghai,Advocates for the petitioner ….. Jasbir Singh, J.(Oral) This writ petition has been filed with a prayer to lay challenge to order dated 3.2.2009 (P5), vide which, the Permanent Lok Adalat (Public Utility Services), Union Territory, Chandigarh (in short the Lok Adalat) has directed the petitioner to give separate water connection to respondent No.2. Relevant portion of the order reads thus:- “We in the first instance made attempt to persuade the contesting parties for an amicable solution/ settlement. Since respondent had resisted the claim on the basis of Bye Laws No.4 & 38, the attempt has failed. Thus we have decided to examine the case on its merits. The sole objection taken by the answering respondent is that the original owner has not consented for a separate water connection and so separate water connection is not permissible in view of bar of Bye Laws 4 & 38. This objection is wholly frivolous. It is the considered position that the original owner of the premises Sh.C.L.Kapoor expired some twenty years back. Obviously, the applicant Civil Writ Petition No.12568 of 2009 cannot comply with such a stipulation. Otherwise too primarily the Bye Laws are framed with a view to carry the mandate of the provisions of the Act and are to be construed so. Since the applicant has already cleared all the arrears with regard to consumption of water as well as has filed an Indemnity Bond as sought by the department, we find no rationale to deprive the applicant of his right to use of the water and thus claim for a separate water connection for premises in his occupation of House No.225, Sector 9, Chandigarh. We accordingly accept the applicant and direct the respondent to give separate water connection in respect of the portion in his occupation forming part of House No.225, Sector 9C, Chandigarh within a period of fifteen days from the date of order of this Lok Adalat.” It is contention of the petitioner that separate connection can be granted only on an application moved by the owner. It is very surprising that such a contention has been raised in this case. It has been noted by the Lok Adalat that the original owner had died 20 years back and he is not available. By taking note of that fact, it was said that the petitioner cannot fulfill the conditions, as propagated by the petitioner. It was also noticed by the Lok Adalat that the petitioner had already cleared all amount due for consumption of water. Plea regarding by-laws existing to the contrary, has rightly been rejected by the Lok Adalat, in view of facts of this case. In view of above, no case is made out for interference. Dismissed. 19.08.2009 (Jasbir Singh) gk Judge 2