1. By means of this writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the order dated 30.11.2017 passed by Sub-Divisional Officer, Electricity Distribution Division-II, Garhmukteshwar, Hapur rejecting the application of the petitioner for sanction of new electricity connection. The reason assigned in the order impugned is that the petitioner, being neither a tenant nor, the owner of the house in question and his father who is already having connection in another house, has refused to give his consent/no objection for a separate connection, it would not be legal to grant new connection.

2. Facts of the case are that the petitioner, who claims to be the adopted son of Dayanand Sharma, is living in one of the houses owned by his father, but due to some family dispute between the wife of petitioner and his father, goods and belongings of the petitioner were thrown out of the house in question. The petitioner thereafter, along with his wife, approached the Superintendent of Police on 27.02.2013 for redressal of his grievances. On its intervention, goods and belongings of petitioner were restored and petitioner could able to get re-entry in the house. Thereafter, respondent no. 5 again lodged a complaint against the petitioner, in which summons were issued. However, further proceeding of the said criminal case has been stayed by this Court.

3. Contention raised on behalf of the petitioner is that the petitioner is living separately in the house in question. Respondent no. 5 does not reside with him. Accordingly, petitioner applied for electricity connection along with a house tax receipt issued by Municipality to demonstrate that he is paying the house tax in respect of the premises in question and is in absolute possession and occupation thereof and therefore, under the circumstances, he is entitled to have electricity connection.

4. From the perusal of documents that have been brought on record, we find that as it was very difficult for the petitioner and his family to survive without electricity, he applied for a new electricity connection, some inquiry was got conducted by the Electricity Supply Division and a report was submitted that petitioner's father have two houses, petitioner is living in one with his family and his father is living in the other. Petitioner's father who is residing in Ward No. 25, Mohalla Jamindaran, Brijghat, Hapur has requested the Executive Engineer (Electricity) not to give any electricity connection to his other house situate in Mohalla Brajghat wherein the petitioner along with his family is residing. This complaint therefore, appears to have become main reason for not granting electricity connection to the petitioner and the same was rejected vide order dated 27.05.2017. Petitioner filed Writ -C NO. 42301 of 2017 but the co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 13.09.2017 refused to interfere with the order refusing the power connection to the petitioner. The order of the Division Bench dated 13.09.2017 is reproduced hereunder:

"Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Chandan Agarwal, learned counsel for the respondent nos. 2, 3, 4 and 5 learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondent.

This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner with a prayer to issue a writ order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned order dated 22.05.2017 passed by respondent no. 2 by which the application moved by the petitioner before him for grant of power connection has been rejected by him on the ground that the petitioner is not the owner of the premises in respect of which power connection is sought and a suit between him and his father, who is the owner of the premises in question is pending before the Civil Court.

It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is seeking power connection in the premises in which he is residing not in the capacity of the owner of the premises but in the capacity of its occupier and hence his application f