1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH SHIMLA. C.W.P No. 8670 of 2010 Date of Decision: 7th May, 2011. Pushpa Sharma. …..Petitioner. Versus Secretary, HPSEB & Etc. …..Respondents. Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Karol, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 No For the Petitioner: Mr. Romesh Verma, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Trilok Jamwal, Advocate. Sanjay Karol, J. (Oral). The petitioner has prayed for following relief: “ 1). That the respondents may kindly be directed to provide the facility of electricity to the petitioner at the earliest, so that the petitioner is in position to enjoy her property as per her choice. In the alternative, the respondents may kindly be directed to take any action which may be required for providing the facility of electricity to the petitioner. Also the respondents be held liable to pay suitable amount of damages.” 2. The following interim orders dated 6-1-2011 and 22-2- 2011 passed by this court are still in operation:- “6.1.2011: Short reply within six weeks. Post on 22.2.2011. In case if it is otherwise feasible, pendency 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 of this writ petition will not come in the way of granting temporary connection to the petitioner. 22.2.2011: In case, connection pursuant to order, dated 6.1.2011 given to the petitioner is for domestic purpose, tariff shall be domestic only. Post for further orders on 18.4.2011.” 3. The respondents in their reply have stated as under: “2). That the replying respondents submit with utmost respect that the petitioner herein had applied for the grant of an electricity connection in her premises vide Application and Agreement form No. 63064-67 copy of the application and Agreement form dated 7-5-2008 is annexed hereto a Annexure-RA-1 for kind perusal of this Hon’ble Court. The perusal of the Annexure RA-1 , would show that the petitioner herein has applied for 18-780 KW load. The petitioner herein had also furnished the No Objection Certificate for the grant of electric connection to her premises along with application form. On receipt of said request for the supply of electric connection, the field Officer of the replying respondents inspected the spot and it was noticed that there exists no L.T line for making supply to the premises of the prospective consumer including the petitioner. It is relevant to submit here that electric supply was earlier released to the house of one Sh. Nanak Chand in the area through service wire and that none had objected to the placing of the service wire in the year of 2005. It is also the respectful submission of the replying respondents that so many houses are being built. Up in the area where the house/premises of the petitioner are situated/located. Though the premises of petitioner has been released an electric connection by extending the service wire from 3 the house of one Sh. Nand Chand. It is further submitted that, there is every likelihood of the said service wire being burnt at any time in as much as the service wire cannot bear the load of the entire vicinity for which the erection of L.T Line is required by providing L.T.AB Cable of 120 mm. Accordingly, an estimate for the erection of the L.T Line amounting to Rs. 40,440/- was prepared by the replying respondents a copy of which is placed on record as Annexure RA-2, and the petitioner was requested to deposit the aforesaid estimate amount which was deposited by the petitioner along with one Sh. L.R Jhamta. The replying respondents further submit with utmost respect that the aforesaid amount was deposited by the petitioner on 12/08/2009 wide receipt contained in Annexure P-4. Upon the deposit of the estimate amount, the filed office of the replying respondent initiated process for the erection of the L.T Line so many times but the process was stopped by one Sh. Nek Ram and Sh. Madan Singh Shandil in as much as they objected to the erection of the L.T Cable/Line. A copy of application received by the replying respondents in this behalf is placed on record as Annexure –RA-3 for kind perusal of his Hon’ble Court. Since the line was to pass over the land/property of the aforesaid persons and that they objected to the erection of the cable/line over and through their land/property. Therefore, the replying respondents requested the petitioner along with one Sh. L.R Jhamta vide letter dated 25/9/2009, a copy of which is annexed hereto as Annexure-RA-4 requesting them to settle the issue with the owner of the land so that the work of erection of line could be started. As nothing was hearing by the replying respondents in response to the letter found at Annexure RA-4, therefore, the respondent No.3 again 4 tendered a request to the petitioner and Sh. L.R Jhamta for the settlement of the issue with the owner but the replying respondents are still in waiting for any response from the petitioner and Sh. L.R Jhamta. In view of the submission made hereinabove and the strong protect- written as well as oral, lodged by the aforesaid persons, the replying respondents are finding it very difficult to erect the L.T line. As already submitted herein supra, the existing service wire cannot bear the applied load of the prospective consumers and in case the electric connections are released form the service wire it may result into any mis-happening and un-fortunate events can take place. Therefore, without the erection of the L.T Cable/line, the electric connection cannot be released to the prospective consumers in the area including the petitioner. It is also the respectful submission of the replying respondents that they are ready and willing to provide electric connection to the petitioner and other prospective consumers in accordance with law, but since the erection/laying of the LT line has been objected to by the individual persons whose land/property falls in the way of L.T Line, therefore, the replying respondents are not in a position to release the electric connection to the prospective consumers. In view of the position stated herein above, the present petition is not maintainable and deserves only dismissal.” 4. Even though petitioner has completed all the formalities, however, respondents are unable to lay down the line for supply of electricity due to objections made on behalf of certain private persons, which perhaps are untenable in law. Undisputably, respondents are not helpless in such a situation. Petitioner’s application being complete in all respect, respondents are duty bound to install the electric 5 connection in accordance with law. The respondents have ample powers to deal with such like situations under the provisions of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885, to the extent of their applicability. 5. Willingness on the part of the respondents to erect the line and release of the electric connection is not in dispute. Consequently, there is a direction to the respondents to complete the process of installation of electric connection to the petitioner’s premises, on the basis of her application, in accordance with law. Needful be positively done within a period of two months from today. 6. Petition stands disposed of. (Sanjay Karol),Judge. May 7, 2011 (Priti)