Point of Law: That electricity dues, where they are statutory in character under the Electricity Act and as per the terms and conditions of supply, cannot be waived in view of the provisions of the Act itself more specifically section 56 of the Electricity Act, 2003

JUDGMENT :

BIREN VAISHNAV, J.

1 The appellant Paschim Gujarat Vij Company Limited (P.G.V.C.L for short) was the original respondent in the Special Civil Application No. 19061 of 2018 which was decided by the learned Single Judge by oral judgment dated 12.12.2019. Ghanshyamsinh Amarsinh Gohil, the original petitioner, had approached the learned Single Judge assailing a communication dated 17.10.2018 issued by the appellant. By the aforesaid communication, the appellant refused to entertain the request of the respondent – petitioner for a new connection for supply of electricity unless and until the outstanding dues to the tune of Rs.1,07,62,381.31 paisa of the previous owner of the land, namely, Chhatrasinh alias Satubha Sarvaiya are paid. The learned Single Judge by the judgment under challenge allowed the petition and held that the appellant electricity company could not have rejected the application filed by the petitioner for a new connection for the supply of electricity as there were no outstanding dues with regard to the land in question.

2. The facts in brief are as under:

2.1 Chhatrasinh alias Satubha Sarvaiya was the owner of land being Survey No. 16 paiki 5 paiki 1. The total land holding of his ownership was 1 hector 82 Are and 11 sq.meters. This was a part of the land of Survey No.16 admeasuring 22 acres and 38 gunthas. Initially, the land was in the name of Harijan Mala Wala. On 12.09.1975, an Entry No. 292 was recorded showing that 4 acres and 20 gunthas of that parcel of land was sold on 26.08.1975 to Makwana Dalpat Pitambar and Dhanji Pitambar. Chhatrasinh alias Satubha Sarvaiya, the previous owner from whom the original petitioner had purchased the land had bought it from Dalpat Pitambar and Dhanji Pitambar. The area was admeasuring 1 hector 82 are and 11 sq.mtrs.

2.2 On 04.03.2017, the original petitioner, Ghanshyamsinh, purchased land admeasuring 1 hector 25 are and 45 sq.mtrs from Satubha Sarvaiya (original land holding of Satubha was 1 hector 82 are and 11 sq.mtrs). On purchase of the land by the petitioner – respondent, he applied for N.A permission, which was rejected on 31.08.2017 on two grounds, one being that the land in question was a subject matter of Civil Suit No. 46 of 2004 filed by the appellant company in the Civil Court at Bhavnagar for outstanding electricity dues from Satubha Sarvaiya and also due to the pendency of a criminal complaint lodged by the company for theft of electricity against Satubha Sarvaiya.

2.3 When the order rejecting N.A dated 31.08.2017 was challenged before this Court by way of Special Civil Application No. 11 of 2018, this Court by an oral order dated 18.01.2018, disposed of the petition and directed the petitioner to file a fresh application under Section 65 of the Gujarat Land Revenue Code, 1879, which was to be considered afresh. The Collector, on such a direction being given considered the request favourably and granted N.A permission to the petitioner. The order of the Collector was passed on 08.10.2018.

2.4 The petitioner – respondent on 16.10.2018, therefore applied for a new connection for supply of electricity with the appellant company which was rejected on the ground that in accordance with the provisions of Clause 4.30 of the Electricity Code, unless the outstanding dues of the previous owner are not cleared, the petitioner – respondent shall not be entitled to a new electricity connection. This communication as aforesaid stated was set aside by the learned Single Judge on the ground that the land for which the dues were outstanding was not the same land in question and cannot be said to be the subject matter of the pending litigation.

3. Ms. Lilu K Bhaya, learned counsel for the appellant made the following submissions:

3.1 That the land bearing survey no.16 of village Fulsar was initially owned by Satuabha Sarvaiya. On 22.01.2003, during the checking it was found that the owner had committed theft of electricity and therefore a bill was issued which was not paid.