IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA MJC No.2683 of 2009 Prof. Ram Chandra Prasad Deva, retired Professor, son of late Radha Prasad Deva, Resident of Village Bhogendrapur Barheta Anchal and Block Kalyanpur, District Samstipur. -------- Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Bihar. 2. Sri D.N. Tiwary, General Manager cum Chairman Electricity Department, Bihar, Patna. 3. Sri B.K. Misra, The Area General Manager cum Managing Director, Mithila Kshetriya Darbhanga. 4. Sri P. Prasad, The Superintending Engineer, Electricity Department, Samastipur. 5. Sri A. Kumar, The Executive Engineer, Electricity Department, Samastipur. 6. Sri B. Kumar, The S.D.O. Electricity Department, Subdivision, Kalyanpur, Samastipur. 7. Sri B. Prasad, The Junior Engineer (Over Seer) Electricity Department, Kalyanpur, Samastipur. ---------- Opposite Parties ----------- For the Petitioner : Mr. Ratan Kumar, Advocate For the B.S.E.B. : Mr. Vinay Kirti Singh, Advocate ----------- P R E S E N T HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MIHIR KUMAR JHA O R D E R (21.07.2010) Mihir Kr. Jha, J. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and counsel for the Bihar State Electricity Board. 2. The prayer for initiating proceeding of contempt on account of non-compliance of an order of this Court dated 10.2.2009 in CWJC No. 14735 of 2006 relevant portion whereof reads as follows:- "The grievance of the petitioner in this writ application pertains to replacement of the transformer as also giving him an electricity connection from the replaced transformer. Such grievance of the petitioner, on the basis of his averments 2 made in the representation enclosed with this writ application, in the first instance, should be looked into by the Superintending Engineer of Samastipur Electricity Supply Circle. That being so, the petitioner may file a fresh representation to the said authority namely Superintending Engineer of Samastipur Electricity Supply Circle, who would be under obligation to dispose of the same within a period of three months from the date of its filing. It goes without saying that the consequential action will await the decision of Superintending Engineer of Samastipur Electricity Supply Circle." has been sought to be opposed by Sri P. Prasad, Electrical Superintending Engineer, Samastipur opposite party no. 4 on various grounds, one of them is as follows:- “7. That it is stated that the Opp. Parties had asked the petitioner to furnish materials and service wire for supply of electricity to his boring but no connection wire was made available by the petitioner till today.” 3. Mr. Vinay Kirti Singh, learned counsel for the Board when asked to explain this aspect of the matter on last day, he had frankly conceded that there was no such power available to the Board and its officials to direct a person seeking electric connection to provide materials and service wire and in 3 fact in presence of the Secretary of the Board an assurance was also given by him that a clarification by a press communiqué will be issued that in future no consumer will be asked to furnish materials and service wire for being given electric connection. 4. Today when Mr. Singh was asked as to whether such press communiqué was issued, his reply was in two fold. It was firstly said that the Electrical Superintending Engineer had given the necessary requisition to the competent authority of in Operation and Maintenance wing of the Board but even then no press communiqué was issued. Secondly Mr. Singh also took a stand that under Supply Code framed by the Bihar Electricity Regulatory Commission (B.E.R.C.), Patna, under Clause-4.13, there is a provision that consumer shall also intimate whether the service line and extensions, if any, shall be laid by the consumer or the licensee and therefore, the Superintending Engineer was justified in not giving connection for the reasons indicated above. 5. In the opinion of this Court, such reading of Clause-4.13 of the Supply Code of the officers of the Board and their learned Standing Counsel seems to be wholly 4 incorrect, inasmuch as, if Clause-4.11 to 4.14 of the Supply Code is read as a whole, it would become clear that the requirement of furnishing certain document/information under 4.13 is hedged by a clear requirement under Clause-4.14 that the licensee i.e. the Board at the time of acceptance of the application shall make verification of the attached document at the time of receipt of the application and no application for new connection for an electrified area shall be refused under any circumstances if it complies with statutory requirement and is in conformity with Act and the supply code. There is also a clear provision that if the same has not been intimated within the stipulated time period about any deficiencies in his application, the application shall be deemed to have been accepted for processing by the licensee. Such clear stipulation under Clause 4.14 of the Supply Code does not leave anything for speculation that a consumer has to not necessarily or compulsorily supply material and service wire for getting an electric connection. 6. From the conjoint reading of the provisions of the Electricity Act 2003 and the Supply Code framed by the B.E.R.C. it 5 becomes clear that the Board would be at best entitled to raise an estimate immediately after filing and acceptance of the application and if the consumer does not pay the estimated amount, it may have a justification for not giving connection. It is only in case where the consumer himself opts to supply the materials and service wire in stead of paying the estimated amount as undertaken in his application that the officials of the Board and refuses to supply them that he can be denied electric connection under Clause 4.19 of the Supply Code, the Board, being the licensee, cannot refuse to give electric connection on the ground that materials and/or service wire was not supplied by the proposed consumer to the Board. Such being the position in law, it would now require both the B.E.R.C. and the Board to issue forthwith a clear press communiqué to this effect in all leading Hindi/English/Urdu newspapers of this State so that every person trying to get electric connection is made aware of his rights and obligations and is not subjected to any kind of harassment as was sought to be inflicted by the present Superintending Engineer on the petitioner. 6 7. That being so, though contempt on the part of opposite party no. 4 is writ large on the record but this Court would give him an opportunity to purge himself and therefore this application is disposed of with a direction to opposite party no. 4, the Electrical Superintending Engineer, Electric Supply Circle, Samastipur to give electric connection to the petitioner within a period of seven days from which he would fulfil the statutory requirement including the requirement of the place where such electric connection has to be given. 8. The personal appearance of the Superintending Engineer is dispensed with. 9. Let a copy of this order be sent to both the Chairman, Bihar Electricity Regulatory Commission and the Secretary, Bihar State Electricity Board for its strict compliance. Patna High Court Dated the 21st July 2010 A.F.R./Rsh (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)