39. IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C)8882/2008. REETA VERMA Petitioner Through: Mr. R.K. Sharma, Advocate. versus • B. S.E. S. RAJDHANI POWER LTD. Respondent Through: Mr. Kamal Sawhney, Advocate. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW 0/ /0 CM No.13872-13873/2010 (of the petitioner for restoration of the petition dismissed for non prosecution on 21' t September, 2010 and for stay). The counsel for the respondent appearing on advance notice has been heard. For the reasons stated in the application, the writ petition is restored to its original position. The counsel for the respondent however states that after the dismissal in default of the petition, the electricity supply has been disconnected. CM No.13873/2010 has as such become infructuous. The applications are 4isposed of 1/- Digitally Signed By:AMULYA Certify that the digital file and physical file have been compared and the digital data is as per the physical file and no page is missing. Signature Not Verified W.P.(C) No.8882/2008. The counsel for the respondent on 21 " September, 20 10 had pointed out that the present petition is not maintainable in view of the judgment of the Division Bench of this Court in Ram Kishan Vs. NDPL 130 (2006) DLT 549. It has as such been enquired from the cdunsel for the petitioner as to how the petition is maintainable. The counsel for the petitioner seeks liberty S to approach the Ombudsman and other fora in terms of the said judgment; he however seeks restoration of the electricity connection till then. The counsel for the respondent has drawn attention to para 15 of the judgment aforesaid where it has been held that the Ombudsman and the Forum under Sections 42(6) & 42(5) of the Electricity Act, 2003 respectively have powers of passing interlocutoiy orders pending the decision of the representation before them and thus the remedy of the petitioner for- any direction for restoration is also before the said fora only and not before this Court. In view of the aforesaid position, the writ petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to approach the Forum under Section 42(5) or the 10 Ombudsman under Section 42(6) of the Electricity Act, 2003 as may be deemed appropriate by the petitioner and on the sahie grounds as taken in 2/- /7 this petition. Liberty is also granted to the petitioner to seek the interlocutory order including of restoration of the electricity supply before the said fora. The petition is disposed of No order as to costs. . OCTOBER 20,2010 pp:. Al ENDLAW;J 3/- 0