DR.D.Y.CHANDRACHUD, J.

I The Controversy

1. Rule, by consent returnable forthwith. With the consent of Counsel and at their request the Petition is taken up for hearing and final disposal.

2. In these proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution the Petitioner seeks (i) a direction to the Maharashtra State Electricity Distribution Company Limited and its Superintending Engineer (the Second and Third Respondents) to allow its application dated 7 October 2010 for the grant of a temporary 100 HP load power supply; and (ii) the setting aside of a demand raised in the amount of Rs. 39,57,15,400/by a letter dated 18 November 2010.

3. The Petitioner is a transferee of the premises in question from the fourth Respondent. The Fourth Respondent purchased the premises in an auction sale conducted in execution of a recovery certificate issued by the Debts Recovery Tribunal. The issue which is raised in the Petition is whether arrears of unpaid electricity charges can be claimed from the Petitioner, who is a subsequent transferee, and if so, what is the quantum of those charges to which the Petitioner is liable. The Petitioner contends that it seeks a fresh electricity connection