SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1986 Supreme(Del) 164

High Court Of Delhi
PAWAN KUMAR TANDON - Appellant
Versus
NEW DELHI MUNICIPAL COMMITTEE - Respondent
Civil Writ 61 of 1986
Decided On : 03/24/1986

Advocates Appeared:
AJIT SINGH, B.J.NAYAR, GOVIND MUKHOTY, R.K.AGARWAL

A licensee under the Indian Electricity Act, 1910 has the power to discontinue the supply of electricity to a premises if it is satisfied that the consumer to whom the electricity was being supplied under a contract is no longer in rightful occupation of the said premises.

Headnote:

ELECTRICITY - DISCONNECTION - JUSTIFICATION - OCCUPATION OF PREMISES - LICENSE AGREEMENT - TERMS AND CONDITIONS - VIOLATION - SUPPLY OF ELECTRICITY - DISCONTINUANCE - POWER OF LICENSEE - NATURAL JUSTICE - NOTICE - INDIAN ELECTRICITY ACT, 1910 - SECTIONS 24, 25 - SCHEDULE, PARA VI.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioners, who were the original allottees of shops in Palika Bazar, New Delhi, had their electricity connection disconnected by the New Delhi Municipal Committee (NDMC) on the ground that they were using gas stoves/kerosene stoves in the premises, which was hazardous and likely to cause fire. The petitioners challenged the disconnection, contending that they had given an undertaking not to use gas stoves or kerosene stoves on the premises and that the disconnection was illegal and arbitrary.

Finding of the Court:

The court held that the NDMC was justified in disconnecting the electricity supply to the petitioners' premises as they were no longer in lawful occupation of the premises. The court found that the petitioners had violated the terms and conditions of the license agreement by parting with possession of the shops to other persons without the consent of the NDMC, and that they were in arrears of license fee and damages for unauthorized occupation. The court also held that the NDMC, as the landlord of the premises as well as the supplier of electricity, had the jurisdiction to decide whether the petitioners continued to be in occupation of the premises or not, and that their decision to discontinue the supply was not arbitrary or based on no evidence.

Issues: 1. Whether the NDMC was justified in disconnecting the electricity supply to the petitioners' premises? 2. Whether the petitioners were entitled to a notice before the disconnection of electricity?

Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court held that the NDMC was justified in disconnecting the electricity supply to the petitioners' premises as they were no longer in lawful occupation of the premises. The court found that the petitioners had violated the terms and conditions of the license agreement by parting with possession of the shops to other persons without the consent of the NDMC, and that they were in arrears of license fee and damages for unauthorized occupation. 2. The court held that the petitioners were entitled to a notice before the disconnection of electricity, but that the NDMC had complied with this requirement by giving the petitioners an opportunity to be heard before the disconnection was upheld.

Final Decision: The court dismissed the writ petitions filed by the petitioners.

( 1 ) THESE two writ petitions arise out of similar facts and can be disposed of by a common order. They raise the question whether the disconnection of supply of electricity to shop Nos. 263 and 264 in the Palika Bazar at Connaught Place, New Delhi is justified or not.

( 2 ) THE shops in Palika Bazar are owned by the New Delhi Municipal Committee ( ndmc for short) which is also the licencee under the Electricity Act responsible for supply of electricity in New Delhi area. The NDMC had granted licences in respect of shop Nos. 263 and 264 in favour of (a) Pawan Kumar Tandon and (b) Babu Shah Snacks Bar, a partnership comprising of two partners, namely, Bharat Bhushan Bansal and Mahesh Chand Rastogi respectively. The licence was in terms of two licence deeds containing the same terms and conditions the relevant provisions of which are set out below :

"1. That the licence should be for a period of five years from 27-1-1979/5-3-1979 and thereafter will be renewable (sic) to increase the rate of licence fee by 10% and on the terms and conditions as may be laid down by the licenser. "

"6. That the licensee (s) shall not permit the allotted premises or any part thereof being used by any other person for any purpose. whatsoever, without previous consent in writing of the licenser and in default thereof shall be liable for ejectment. The licensee (s) shall not introduce any partner nor the licensee (s) otherwise carry on the business in the premises with any other person, or assign, transfer change or otherwise alienate his interest in the premises. "

"8. That the licensee shall not cook, manufacture or prepare any food in or outside the shop/stall or in the verandah outside thereof nor shall he suffer or allow any person to do so. "

"17. That the licensed premises have been provided with electrical installations excluding fans and liting (sic) fixtures and the same shall be handed over on "as is where is basis". The licensee (s) shall have to obtain electric connections in his/their name after completing all the formalities like deposit of new connection fee and security etc. as may be applicable. The energy consumption charges shall also be borne by them. If any Additional load is required the licensee shall apply on prescribed pro forma to electricity department of NDMC along with No Objection from Secretary. NDMC. Their request shall he examined as per the prevailing rules. "

( 3 ) IN compliance with the terms of the licence deeds each of the licensees applied for electricity connection from the NDMC. There is no dispute that according to the registers of the NDMC (Electricity Department) Babu Shah Snacks Bar and Pawan Kumar Tandon are the consumers of electricity in respect of these two premises. The grievance made in these writ petitions is that the electricity connection has been suddenly disconnected on 4th Jan. , 1986 without serving any show,cause notice and that the electric supply has not been restored despite several representations made in this regard. It is stated that on making enquiries it appears that the electricity connection had been disconnected on the ground that "since 263 and 264 are working as one unit and using gas stove/kerosene, the current need not be restored till they remove these inflammable material". This indeed is confirmed by a noting made in the NDMC and orders passed thereon by the Administrator on 9-1-1986. It is stated further in the writ petitions that though subsequently undertakings have been duly given that no cooking will be done in the premises, the electric supply has not been restored. A grievance has been made of the fact that electric supply has been restored to one of the premises, namely, shop No. 255 whereas it has not been restored in the case of the shops presently in question. The petitioners, therefore, pray that a direction should he issued to the NDMC directing them to restore the electric connection to the shops in question and restraining them from again disconnecting the elec














Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top