IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.7840 of 2011 Pramod Kumar Agarwal S/o Late Haridwari Lal Agarwal, Proprietor Shakti Traders @ Shakti Textiles at Shop No. S97, Khetan Super Market, Resident of Mohalla-301, Om Complex, S.P. Verma Road, P.S. Gandhi Maidan, District- Patna. . . . . . Petitioner. Versus 1. Bihar State Electricity Board, through the Chairman, Patna. 2. Secretary, Bihar State Electricity Board, Patna. 3. Chief Engineer, Energy and Accounting, Bihar State Electricity Board, Patna. 4. Chief Engineer, Commercial, Bihar State Electricity Board, Patna. 5. Electrical Executive Engineer Electrical Supply Area, Bankipur Division, Patna. 6. Asstt. Electrical Engineer, Electrical Supply Sub-Division, Bankipore Sub-Division, Patna. 7. Savita Agrawal Wife of Shri Radhe Shyam Agarwal, Resident of 304, Radha Krishna Plaza, Near Hathwa Market, P.S. Pirbahore, District- Patna. . . . . . Respondents. ----------- 2/ 25.07.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the Electricity Board. The petitioner submits that he is tenant of respondent no.7 in respect of a shop bearing no. S 97 in Khetan Super Market, Patna. He further submits that he entered into oral tenancy agreement in the year 2005 and since then he has paid electric bill regularly in cash and he holds the entire original receipts of electric bills. He further submits that respondent no.7 had agreed to sell the said shop to the petitioner but later on he has backed out after receiving a sum of Rs.5,00,000/-. The petitioner submits that the Electric line has been disconnected on the application of respondent no.7. He further submits that he is in occupation of the shop in question and as such the Board should not have acted upon the application of respondent no.7, if the bills have been paid regularly. The petitioner undertakes that he will regularly pay the 2 billed amount to the Board. Counsel for the Board submits that the Electric Meter is in the name of respondent no.7 and as such on application of respondent no.7 electric line may have been disconnected. For the present, this Court is not going into the merit of this case whether the respondent no.7 entered into an agreement for sale of the premise to the petitioner or not. For the purpose of disposal of this case, I observe as follows: (a) The respondent Board would restore the electric connection on payment of Rs. 10,000/- to the Board and the petitioner would be required to show the original receipts of the electricity bill at the time of depositing of money to show that he has been paying the electric bill since last 3 to 4 years. (b) The petitioner may file an application under 7.9 of Bihar Electricity Supply Code, 2007 for transfer of Electric Meter in his name and on receipt of such application, the respondent Board would dispose of the same after hearing respondent no.7 as well. With the aforesaid direction, this application is disposed of. Uday/ (Samarendra Pratap Singh, J.)