Jayanta Kumar Biswas, J.

( 1 ) THE petitioner alleges inaction on the part of CESC saying that it has not given independent supply of electricity to him, though as a tenant of the premises concerned he has a legal right to get such supply.

( 2 ) IN the opposition filed by the third respondent (the landlord of the petitioner) it has been stated that after entering into the premises in the year 1988, till the year 2004, when the application seeking independent supply of electricity was made, the petitioner did not consume any electricity through the existing supply line of the premises. There is no dispute that a high-tension supply line, given to the premises by CESC, was, and still is, in existence.

( 3 ) COUNSEL for CESC submits that there are about two hundred establishments carrying on their activities from the premises. He says that the transformer through which the high-tension supply was given is owned by the third respondent, which was, and still is, lawfully giving supply of electricity to the tenants and occupiers of the premises through separate sub-meters. There is also no dispute that the petitioner, if he so wanted, could have consumed electricity from the existing

Click Here to Read the rest of this document