1. Denial of electricity connection to a temple mahant's son by Railway authorities. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 )
Back
Next 
2026 Supreme(Online)(All) 97859
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
Prakash Padia, Vivek Saran, JJ
Fanindra Das – Appellant
Versus
General Manager – Respondent
WRIT - C No. - 51747 of 2012
Advocates:
For the Appellants/ Petitioners: B. K. Tripathi, Pramod Kumar
For the Respondents: Rakesh Kumar Mishra, SC
For the Appellants/ Petitioners: B. K. Tripathi, Pramod Kumar
For the Respondents: Rakesh Kumar Mishra, SC
Access to electricity is an indispensable basic amenity and a fundamental right under Article 21 of the Constitution of India; therefore, occupants cannot be deprived of electricity connections based on administrative guidelines if they are residing on the premises.
Headnote:(A) Right to Life - Access to Electricity - Electricity is categorized as a basic amenity and an indispensable need to live in modern times; denying such access violates the right to live as a human being under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. (Para 7, 11)
(B) Fundamental Rights - Right to Shelter and Infrastructure - The right to shelter is not merely a roof over one's head but includes necessary infrastructure such as electricity, water, and sanitation to enable a person to develop physically and mentally. (Para 8)
(C) Administrative Action - Denial of Basic Amenity - Railway authorities cannot deny electricity connections to occupants based on internal board letters or private land disputes if the occupant is residing there, as access to electricity is a fundamental right. (Para 10, 12)
Issues: Whether the denial of an electricity connection to the petitioner by the Railway authorities is permissible under the law given that electricity is a basic amenity under Article 21.
Legal Category Hierarchy
- constitutional law
- electricity law
- administrative law
- practice and procedure
Table of Contents
2. Petitioner argued right to electricity; Railway cited policy barring connections on private land. (Para 3 , 4 )
3. Electricity is a basic amenity under Article 21 of the Constitution. (Para 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 )
4. Right to electricity is a fundamental right under Article 21 as a basic human need. (Para 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 )
5. Writ allowed; impugned orders quashed; directed to provide electricity connection within 30 days. (Para 13 , 14 )
6. Is electricity a fundamental right under Article 21 of the Constitution?
Yes, electricity is an indispensable basic amenity and part of the right to life under Article 21. (Para 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 )
7. Can electricity connection be denied to a person on the ground of absence of no-objection certificate from the landowner?
No. The electricity authority need only examine whether the applicant is in occupation of the premises. (Para 9 )
8. What constitutes the right to shelter under Article 21?
Right to shelter includes adequate living space, safe structure, light, air, water, electricity, sanitation, and civic amenities. (Para 8 )
AFR
Court No.-5
(Per: Hon'ble Vivek Saran, J.)
1. Heard Sri Pramod Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Rakesh Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for respondent-North Eastern Railway, Gorakhpur and none for the respondent no.4 i.e. Purvanchal Vidyut Vitran Nigam Ltd. Gorakhpur.
2. The instant petition has been filed with the following reliefs:-
“A- ISSUE, a writ order in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned order dated 26.7.2011 and impugned order dated 9.5.2012 passed by Respondent no.3 and Respondent no.1 against the petitioner, the application for the installation of New Electric connection or transfer the existing electric connection in the name of petitioner has been turned down and the rejected by authorities, Respondent Railway depriving the petitioner from electric supply.
B. ISSUE, a writ order/ direction in the nature of suitable mandamus commanding the respondent Railway authorities transfer the existing electric connection operating since 1978 in the name (late) Mahanat Aniruddha Das father of the petitioner and his elder brother and restore the supply of the petitioner by same through Sub-meter dividing the in favour of the petitioner.”
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that there exists a temple within the Railway Colony at Ballia where his deceased father late Aniruddha Das was a 'Mahant' and during his lifetime, the electricity connection was provided by the Railway Authorities but after his death the same has been denied citing that there was some dispute amongst the petitioner and his brother namely Makardhwaj Das. He submits that the reasoning contained in the order impugned dated 9.5.2012 are that on the land appurtenant to the said temple, there are houses existing on private land and under the directions of the Governor of Uttar Pradesh issued in December, 1978, an electricity connection was provided to mahant Aniruddha Das and the same is still continuing and used by Makardhwaj Das. However, vide Railway Board's letter dated 30.9.1996, no electricity connection can be provided on the private land by the Railway Administration and, therefore, no electricity connection can be given to the petitioner.
4. Learned counsel representing the respondent-Railway has reiterated the stand taken by the respondent in their impugned communication dated 9.5.2012. He has further placed reliance on the Railway Board order dated 30.09.1986 which categorically provides that electricity connection may be given to private parties/public Government Department if they are connected with the Railway working and are also authorized occupants of Railway land.
5. No counter affidavit has been filed by the respondent no.4 i.e. Purvanchal Vidyut Vitran Nigam Ltd. Gorakhpur nor anybody is present for the said respondent.
6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record, it is clear that the Railway have denied granting of electricity connection to the petitioner citing certain reasons since the place where the petitioner wants an electricity connection is situated in the midst of the property belonging to the Railways and, therefore, it can be fairly presumed that an electricity connection can only be granted by the Railway Authority.
7. In view of various legal pronouncements now, the right to life as enshrined under Article 21 of the Constitution of India is not limited to be basic animal needs of man. In an organised society, right to live as a human being would not be possible without adequate living space, safe and decent structure, clean and decent surroundings, sufficient light, pure air and water, electricity, sanitation and other civic amenities like roads etc.
8. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in re. Chameli Singh and others Vs. State of U.P. and another , ((1996) 2 SCC 549) while dealing with human rights in an organized society in para 8 of the judgement has held as under:-
"8. In any organised society, right to live as a human being is not ensured by meeting only the anima
