Honble BALIA, J.–Heard learned counsel for the parties.

(2). The petitioner is aggrieved with the order passed by the District Magistrate, Churu on 20.2.1996 directing the petitioner to restore the electricity connection which has been disconnected for want of payment of bills issued by the then Rajasthan State Electricity Board by affirming the order passed by SDM, Churu dt.29.11.1995.

(3). The petitioner alleges that relationship between landlord and respondent No.3 has not been established and therefore the said direction could not have been issued u/S.12 of the Rajasthan Premises (Control of Rent & Eviction) Act, 1950.

(4). Two authorities have relied on the statement about the ownership of the premises given by an employee of the tenant of the adjoining shop that the petitioner is owner of the shop in question. Even according to the affidavit now produced by the petitioner that house in which shop situated belongs to the petitioner and shops to his son Abbas. The electricity bills are received in the name of said Abbas, directing by one Liakat Ali. As per terms the bills are deposited by the landlord.

(5). On disclosure of these facts learned counsel for the petitioner was directe

Click Here to Read the rest of this document