Darshnaben Navnitlal Parikh vs Executive Engineer and Others

Honourable Mr. Justice K.M. Thaker

Heard Mr. Jani, learned advocate for the petitioner and Ms. Bhaya, learned advocate for respondent No. 2. The petitioner has prayed for below mentioned relief:

10(B) Your Lordships may be pleased to issue awrit, order or direction directing the respondent authorities to provide 24 hours 3 phase Electric Connection for residential purpose to the petitioner for which the petitioner has already deposited amount demanded by GEB and which is not provided since long.

As a preliminary objection, Ms. Bhaya, learned advocate for respondent No.2 has submitted that alternative remedy is available to the petitioner before the Electricity Consumer Forum and that, therefore, present petition may not be entertained.

Having regard to the relief prayed for by thepetitioner, this Court is of the view that the reliefas prayed for cannot be granted and the petition doesnot deserve to be entertained. First of all, since the petitioner has alternative remedy available as provided under the Act, the petition does not deserve to be entertained and this Court is not inclined toentertain present petition.

Besides this, another reason for not entertaining this petition is that the petitioner has prayed that the respondents may be directed to provide 24 hours electricity supply for residential purpose to the petitioner. In view of the fact that the power supply is subject to several variables including the shortage of power, technical problems sufficient availability of entire power problems, etc.

The power supply is dependent on the said and such other aspects, hence any direction compelling the petitioner to supply electricity supply to 24 hours to the petitioner cannot be passed.

Mr. Jani, learned advocate for the petitioner has placed reliance on the reply given by the respondents in paragraph 10 of the reply affidavit dated 23.8.2011. The said paragraph 10 of the reply affidavit reads thus:

Respondents submit that the respondents are ready and willing to provide the connection for 24 hours but the consumers have to pay the applicable tariff rate. They cannot get the benefit of one tariff of agricultural tariff and get 24 hours supply. It is submitted that the electricity consumption charges are required to be calculated as per the purpose for which the electricity is being used which is decided by the Gujarat Electricity Regulatory Commission. The respondents are ready and willingness to pay the charges for consumption as per the purpose for which it is used as per the applicable tariff."

Mr. Jani, learned advocate for the petitioner has submitted that in view of the said submissions, the respondent company should supply electricity to the petitioner because the petitioner is paying the electricity charges / bill charges according to the tariff and the bills which are raised by the respondent company.

On the other hand the learned advocate for the respondent has relied on paragraph 8 of the said affidavit which reads thus:

It is submitted that representation was made by Ankur Orchard''s Estate Owners'' Association to the Govt. of Gujarat for giving benefit of Jyoti Gram Yojana in their scheme and it was conveyed by the respondent on 16.6.2006 and 25.7.2006 and they were directed to surrender/give consent for water works tariff of their existing agricultural connection. They were also informed that after payment of estimate charges for the change of power from the Rural Feeder to Urban Feeder, the benefit of 24hours supply can be made available to their premises/scheme.

As mentioned above, the supply is dependent upon several variables and that, therefore, a direction of nature prayed for by the petitioner is not capable of being granted.

Therefore, present petition is not entertained and is disposed of.

It is, however, clarified that if the petitioner desires to approach the Electricity Consumer Forum with the grievance, it will be open to the petitioner to take out appropriate proceedings before the Electricity Consumer Forum and this order will not stand in way of the petitioner.

If the proceedings are taken out by the petitioner before the Electricity Consumer Forum, the authority will decide the same on merits and in accordance with law and in accordance with terms and conditions of supply code and other requisite policy applicable to the petitioner. With the aforesaid clarification, the petition is disposed of.