An occupier, irrespective of the legality of possession, is entitled to get electricity connection at the property.

JUDGMENT :

1. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends, by placing reliance on the annexure to the affidavit-in-opposition filed by the respondent no.4, along with the annexure to the affidavit-in-reply filed by the petitioner, that although previously the respondent no.4 had obtained an ex parte injunction order allegedly protecting his possession in respect of the disputed property, a subsequent order of injunction was passed by another civil court, where, upon hearing both sides, the court came to the conclusion that the present petitioner is in possession of a portion for the property, which entitles the plaintiff/petitioner to the use of electricity.

2. Learned counsel appearing for the private respondent controverts the allegation as regards the petitioner being in possession and submits that the prior order of injunction was subsisting in favour of the respondent no.4, observing that the said respondent was in possession of the property, when the second injunction order was passed in favour of the petitioner. In such circumstances, allegedly suppressing the same, the present petitioner obtained the order of injunction from the other civil court.

3. It is further apprehended by the private respondent that if any electricity connection is given in favour of the petitioner, the same may create a special equity in favour of the petitioner, particularly insofar as the pending civil suits are concerned.

4. Learned counsel appearing for the CESC Limited submits that, otherwise, the CESC has no objection to give electricity connection to the petitioner. However, due to obstruction put up by the private respondent and his men and agents, such connection is not being able to be given.

5. A perusal of the respective injunction orders passed by the two courts in favour of each of the contesting parties indicates that the order of status-quo passed in favour of the present private respondent was obtained on December 16, 2016.

6. The said order, however, was passed ex parte, although even such an order is equally binding as one passed on contest.

7. However, the complication has arisen subsequently when the present writ petitioner preferred another suit before a different civil court, that is, the Civil Judge, Senior Division, Seventh Court at Alipore bearing Title Suit No. 470 of 2019, where the said civil court, upon a contested hearing of both sides, including the private respondent, passed an order restraining the private respondent and the other defendants from causing any disturbance in the supply of electricity to the plaintiff therein, that is, the present writ petitioner.

8. It was also prima facie found by the said civil court in the subsequent contested order that the writ petitioner is in possession of a portion of the suit property, irrespective of whether the writ petitioner is a trespasser or not, which entitels the petitioner to use electricity on the premises.

9. In view of such conflicting findings, it is beyond the scope of the writ court to enter into the factual merits and demerits of the respective cases of the parties, particularly as regards their right, title and possession in respect of the disputed property.

10. However, since the order passed in favour of the writ petitioner was subsequent and was passed on contest, for the purpose of ascertaining electricity connection, we have to presume on a prima facie footing that the petitioner is all probability in possession of the said property.

11. Of course, such issue will be thrashed out by the parties and decided by the civil courts ultimately in connection with the suits.

12. Even then, the argument of the private respondent that the definition of “occupier” in Rule 2 of the Works of Licensees Rules, 2006 includes a person in lawful occupation cannot cut ice in the present case.

13. The various provisions of the 2006 Rules indicate primarily that prior consent of the owner or occupier of any building or land has to be taken before carrying out works as envisaged there