MC 1968/2010 BEFORE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE AMITAVA ROY Heard Mr P Talukdar, learned counsel for the applicant; Mr PD Nair, lear ned counsel for the opposite party-writ petitioner and Mr HK Sarma, learned coun sel for the opposite party- Board. The writ petition is one seeking for an appropriate direction to the opp osite party-Board, amongst others, to restore electricity in the petitioner’s bu siness premises under the name and style of ’Baruah Servicing Centre and ’Barua h Industries’ at K.K. Road, New Amolapatty, Golaghat. A direction has also been sought for to transfer the connection with opposite-Board in favour of the writ petitioner. The applicant herein is the brother of the writ petitioner and admittedl y the premises involved is owned by their father Sri Jitendra Nath Baruah who is presently alive. The applicant contends that the writ petitioner meanwhile has been disowned by the father, a plea stoutly denied by the latter. In the above factual premise, having regard to the reliefs prayed for in the writ petition and the mutual orientation of the parties, it is considered a ppropriate for a full, fair and complete adjudication thereof, that the prayer f or impleadment ought to be allowed. Ordered accordingly. The applicant would be impleaded as respondent No.5 in the accompanying WP(C) No. 4257/2009. Office would make the necessary corrections accordingly. Misc. case is allowed