ORDER

The present petition has been filed challenging the letter/order dated 29.03.2022 issued by the respondent No.2.

2. By the said letter the petitioner has been intimated that he was given temporary connection on 18.10.2017 in rented premises which is almost 5 years since the date of grant of connection. It is further contended that connection has been given without consent of landlord. Thus on the grounds that connection has been given without consent of landlord and temporary connection cannot be given for more than 1 year, it has been mentioned in the said letter that connection is liable to be disconnected.

3. By interim order dated 21.04.2022, this Court has directed the authorities to maintain status quo with respect to electricity connection till next date of hearing. This interim order is continuing till date.

4. Short facts as mentioned in the writ petition are that the petitioner is running a school in rented premises and rent note was executed on 28.03.2011. Thereafter, the landlord filed eviction suit against the present petitioner which was dismissed by the Civil Court but appeal was allowed by the District Court against the said judgment passed by the Lower Appellate Court which has been challenged in Second Appeal No1594/2018 that is pending before this Court and there is stay on decree of eviction. The said Second Appeal has been admitted for final hearing. The petitioner has also averred that a notice dated 09.02.2022 was issued for disconnecting the electricity connection on the ground that petitioner has not been able to submit consent of the landlord.

When the said letter was replied by the petitioner that his being a tenant is well established in view of eviction suit filed by the landlord in M.P. Accommodation Control Act then, the respondent have issued the letter Annexure-P/7 on additional ground that temporary connection cannot be given for more than 1 year.

5. The petitioner has contended that impugned letter has been issued only on the asking of the landlord as a arm-twisting tactics to get accommodation evicted by depriving electricity supply. It is submitted that the petitioner is running a educational institution (School) in the accommodation in question. Denial of electricity supply would prejudice running of the school.

6. Per contra, it is stated by the learned counsel for the Electricity Company that as per Clause 4.43 of M.P Electricity Supply code, 2013, temporary connection cannot be given for a period of more than 2 years.

Petitioner was having temporary connection since almost last 5 years and period of connection could not be extended by the Electricity Company in violation of Clause 4.43 of the Electricity Supply Code which is statutory in nature being framed in exercise of powers under Section 50 of M.P. Electricity Act, 2003.

7. An application for intervention has been filed on behalf of the landlord which is I.A No.13532/2023. It is stated in the said application that school is being run by the petitioner in premises of property belonging to intervenor in his family. It is also stated that the Director of petitioner society is one Shri Ram Naresh Yadav and in some other premises in possession of the same petitioner there is an allegation of electricity theft against the same petitioner. Document Annexure I.A/1 as referred for that purpose. Thus, petitioner has not approached with clean hands.

8. Heard learned counsel for parties and perused the record.

9. The present case involves the question whether the order Annexure- P/7 proposing disconnection of temporary connection on the ground that temporary connection cannot be granted for more than one year and also that whether connection can be granted without consent of the landlord, is valid or not. To determine the right of a person to get electricity supply, interpretation of Rules and Regulations and supply code has to be made on the anvil of Section 43 of M.P. Electricity Act, 2003. Section 43 casts an obligation on