Back
2024 Supreme(Online)(DEL) 537
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Swarana Kanta Sharma, J
SWATI SAISTA – Appellant
Versus
UNION OF INDIA & ORS. – Respondent
W.P.(CRL)-104/2024
The principle of res judicata applies to writ petitions, barring re-litigation of previously adjudicated claims, particularly regarding the disconnection of electricity due to non-payment of dues.
Headnote:(A) Constitution of India - Article 21 - Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Section 166 - Writ petition for restoration of electricity and compensation for violation of fundamental rights - Petitioner, a resident and consumer of electricity, claimed illegal disconnection of electricity by housing society and inaction by police - Court found no merit in claims, noting previous dismissal of similar petition and lack of evidence for violation of rights. (Paras 1-27)
(B) Res Judicata - Principle applicable to writ petitions - Court held that similar issues had been previously adjudicated, barring re-litigation of the same claims. (Paras 13-20)
(C) Domestic Violence Act, 2005 - Section 12 - Interim protection order issued against husband - Court noted that the order did not impose obligations regarding payment of electricity bills. (Paras 4, 24)
(D) Electricity Act, 2003 - Petitioner failed to pay dues, leading to disconnection - Court emphasized that housing society is not obliged to restore supply without payment. (Paras 22-23) (E)
Findings of Court:
The petition was dismissed as it was found to be frivolous and previously adjudicated, with no breach of fundamental rights established. (Paras 26-27) (F)
Result: Petition dismissed.
SWARANA KANTA SHARMA, J.
1. The present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India , read with Section 166 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 („ IPC ‟) has been filed on behalf of the petitioner, praying as follows:
- “A) Issue a writ of mandamus and/or any other appropriate writ, order and/or direction in the nature thereof, thereby directing the concerned to take appropriate action to restore Electricity to the residence of the Petitioner, located at Flat No. B-503, Meghdoot Apartment, Meghdoot CGHS Ltd., Plot No. 19, Sector - 7, Dwarka, New Delhi - 110 075 and also to ensure registration of F.LR. against Respondents No. 5, 6 and 7, in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Law, for their role in violating fundamental right of the Petitioner.
- B) Order criminal proceedings against Respondents No. 2, 3 and 4 for their failure to discharge their lawful duties and their wilful violation of the relevant provisions under Section 166 of the Indian Penal Code, for the negligence on their part to perform their duties and responsibilities even after 1 year since lodging complaint regarding the illegal disconnection of Electricity to the residence of the Petitioner.
- C) Order Respondents No. 1, 2, 3,4, 5, 6 and 7 to pay compensation to the Petitioner, for their role in violation of Fundamental Right of the Petitioner.
- D) Provide such other relief as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit in the circumstances of the case.”
2. The case set out by the petitioner, in brief, is that she is a resident of flat no. B 503, Meghdoot Apartment, Meghdoot CGHS Ltd., Plot No. 19, Sector 7, Dwarka, New Delhi and is a „consumer of electricity‟ as per the Electricity Act, 2003 . She states that the said flat is registered in the name of her husband Sh. Dhirendra Kumar i.e. respondent no. 6, who had left her alone at the said address and had shifted to a new accommodation on 02.01.2019 along with their minor son. The petitioner states that she is a victim of domestic violence and she had filed an application under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 („DV Act‟) on 11.01.2019 against her husband and the learned Mahila Court-02, Dwarka Courts, New Delhi was pleased to pass an interim protection order dated 07.09.2020 in CC No. 1582/2019, wherein her husband was restrained from committing any act of physical violence or harassment, and was also ordered to pay interim maintenance of Rs. 1,00,000/- per month the present petitioner. It is stated that the said order was upheld by the learned Principal District & Sessions Judge on 01.10.2021 vide order passed in CA No. 169 and 180 of 2020.
3. The petitioner claims that she has been in the occupation of the abovesaid flat, which was not allotted in the name of the petitioner, but her husband Sh. Dhirendra Kumar i.e. respondent no. 6 is the allottee of the said flat. It is the grievance of the petitioner that Meghdoot Cooperative Group Housing Society i.e. respondent no. 5, acting on behalf of her husband i.e. respondent no. 6 and in collusion with BSES Rajdhani Power Limited („BRPL‟) i.e. respondent no. 7, had disconnected the electricity of the petitioner‟s flat on 15.11.2022, but had then restored it on 22.11.2022 after pasting a notice outside her flat that she must pay her electricity dues, and had again disconnected it on 29.11.2022. She states that these acts have caused severe hardship and mental harassment to the petitioner, depriving her of her fundamental right under Article 21 of the Constitution of India .
4. The Petitioner, who appears in person, submits that respondent no. 5, i.e. the Housing Society had illegally disconnected her electricity connection on 29.11.2022, which was supplied by respondent no. 7 to the petitioner‟s flat. She further states that she has filed several complaints against respondent no. 5 and 6 with the police i.e. respondents no. 2, 3 and 4, however, they have failed to take any action and has rather closed her complaints in
