H.S.E.B. GURGAON vs RAM AVTAR SINGH CHAUHAN

WHETHER Section 29 of the Electricity Supply Act mandates the supply of electricity to unauthorised urban colonies has come to be the core question in this appeal.

THE Haryana State Electricity Board appeals against the order of the District Forum, Gurgaon directing that the supply of electricity poles and wires would be the liability of the appellant for supplying the electricity to consumers admittedly in an unapproved and unauthorised colony in Gurgaon City. 3.THE respondent-complainant is a practicing advocate who claims to have applied for an electric connection for his residential use and also deposited the security amount of Rs. 403/-, therefor alongwith an electric meter for installation on the 7th of August, 1991. THE primal grievance was that despite his application, the appellant-Board had not provided him with electric energy which thus grossly prejudice him both professionally and otherwise with regard to the education of his children etc. because obviously such a supply is now a necessity. 4.In resolutely defending the complaint, the appellant-Board raised the preliminary objection that the respondent had not come to the jurisdiction with clean hands. It was highlighted that the electricity connection were sought in an admittedly unapproved colony namely Devi Lal Nagar by the respondent and his other surrounding neighbourers. THE implicit stand was that the Board was under no obligation at all to supply such electricity, but even otherwise special charges to the tune of Rs. 8956/- were estimated for the supply which were never tendered and consequently no connection could be released. On merits it was the stand that the complainant-respondent had defaulted in supply the required material namely the electricity poles, low tension lines, cables etc. It was the plea that connection if at all could be released, when all the requisite materials had duly been furnished. It was hence, prayed that the complaint be dismissed with special costs under Section 35-A of the C.P.C. 5.In the replication filed by the respondent, the stand that Devi Lal Nagar was an unauthorised and unapproved colony was not at all controverted. THE grievance if any was that some other residents had not been required to pay for the requisite electricity materials or poles, wires etc. 6. In support of his case, the respondent placed on record some affidavits of the co-residents of Devi Lal Nagar Colony averring that they had not deposited any amount for the supply of electricity material i.e. poles and steel wires etc. and these had been supplied by the Board for providing connection to them. In rebuttal Maha Singh, Assistant Foreman of the Sub Divisional Office, H.S.E.B, put in his affidavit, controverting the averments on behalf of the complainant and reiterating that all such residents had been obliged to pay the required materials and labour charges without which no connection was released. 7.THE District Forum taking a somewhat indulgent view has observed that Section 29 of the Electricity Supply Act envisaged not only the sanctioning of any scheme, but also its publication in the official gazette and apparently implied that thereunder the appellant-Board had a duty to supply electricity even to unauthorised, unapproved urban colonies. It also took the view that damanding the charges of materials from the respondent was hostile, discrimination against him and granted relief in the terms noticed at the out-set, to the effect that the street poles and wires would be the liability of the appellant-Board whereas other materials required from connection point to meter point in the house of the consumer would be provided by the said consumer. 8.Mrs. Sushil Dogra, learned Counsel for the appellant-Board has frontally assailed the very approach and equally the rationale of the order under appeal. It was contended that Section 29 of the Electricity Supply Act on which the order purports to be rested has not the least relevance to the case. THE core submission was that the appellant-Board had never in the least undertaken any obligation to supply electricity to unauthorised and virtually illegal urban colonies and, therefore, no question of any deficiency in service within the consumer jurisdiction can arise. It was contended that the somewhat altruistic observations of the District Forum can only lead to the mischievous result of the creation of slums and shanty towns, and there perpetuation. 8A. THEre is patent merits in the stand and the submissions aforesaid. One may advert to Section 29 of the Electricity Supply Act which is the king-pin of the District Forum''s order. THE relevant part of the first two Sub-sections may be noticed in extenso : "29. Submission of Schemes for concurrence of authority etc. (1) Every scheme estimated to involve a capital expenditure exceeding one crore of rupees shall, as soon as may be after its preparation, be submitted to the Authority for its concurrence.

(2) Before finalization of any scheme of the nature referred to in Sub-section (1) and the submission thereof to the Authority for concurrence, the Board or, as case may be, the Generating Company shall cause such scheme, which among other things shall contain the estimates of the capital expenditure involved, salient features thereof and the benefits that may accrue therefrom to be published in the official gazette of the State concerned and in such local newspapers as the Board or the Generating Company may consider necessary alongwith a notice of the date, not being less than two months after the date of such publication, before which licencees and other persons interested may make representations on such scheme."

In the context of the aforesaid provision what first deserves highlighting is the facts that it was the firm stand of the appellant-Board that indeed no scheme pertaining to the unauthorised colony of Devi Lai Nagar was ever prepared at all far from it being publicised as required by the aforesaid provision. Mrs. Dogra has categorically taken the stand that herein the appellant-Board had at no stage willingly contemplated or published any such scheme in the official gazette or the local newspapers etc. Now once that is so, it would be manifest that even factually, the provisions of Section 29 would not be at all attracted to the present situation. 10. Apart from above the District Forum seems to have missed the gut question that Sections 28 and 29 of the Act do not mandate the supply of electricity to unauthorised and illegal urban colonies. THE statute obviously is intended for the provisions of supply to authorised and well accepted urban development and not to persons in colonies acting directly contrary thereto. A reading of Sections 28 and 29 pertaining to the preparation and sanctioning of the schemes and there submission for concurrence of the authorities etc. makes it plain that there is not the least obligation or duty cast on the appellant-Board and indeed there is an implicit prohibition against the supply of electricity to areas directly contrary to the larger regulated urban development. It is thus manifest that the District Forum''s reference and reliance to Section 29 in the present context was both extraneous and vain. 11. Yet again, it appears to us that the very approach of the District Forum to the significant issue herein involved is somewhat warped. It was observed by it as under: "After hearing both the parties and considering the matter carefully we are of the opinion that it is the duty of the Board/opposite party to provide poles and wire in the main streets and no consumer can be asked to provide poles for grant of electric connection. Ours is a socialistic pattern and electricity and other essential services are to be provided by the State to its citizens. THE affidavit filed by the AFM is vauge. It does not contain that poles and cable for being used in the streets was provided by the consumers from the transformer to their houses, or even from the last pole to their houses. However, the material i.e. cable etc. from the last pole i.e. connection point to the meter point in the house of the consumer is to be provided by the consumer himself and it is not the liability of the opposite party. As regards the framing or approval of any such scheme for the area as alleged, Section 29 of the Electricity Supply Act envisages not only the sanctioning of any scheme but also its publication in the official gazette and in such local newspaper as the authorities consider necessary which is mandatory as held in Sarwan Singh v. Ranjit Singh etc. 1992 (2) LJRs. 562. It has never been pleaded by the opposite party that the said scheme for the area was got published in any official gazette of in any local newspaper so that the concerned persons could know of the same and make representation against it if so desired."

THEre need be no quarrel with the aforesaid alturistic approach with the prominent rider that such amenities are to be provided to the law abiding citizens and consumers and not to those who illegally encroach and act directly contrary to the building rules of regulated development. THE high sounding concept of socialistic pattern is not a base for the creation of slums and unauthorised colonies and lighting them up for perpetuation in hesterity. 13. In the consumer jurisdiction the somewhat discordant view taken by the District Forum that the violatees of the law are entitled to the electricity can lead to anomalous consequences. As the inevitable drift of people from villages towards the towns gains momentum in our country already over-populated, the problems of quick urbanisation loom large and indeed sometimes appear to defy solution. This erupts in the shape of sores like slums and shanty towns. Perhaps, this is inevitable in the transitional period from an agricultural economy to an industrial one. However, it cannot be disputed that the regulated development of urban areas for residential, commercial industrial and building purposes in the altogether new or urban town of our estate assumes a momentous significance. THE State would indeed be failing in its duty if it did not address itself to this problem. To lend a handle to unauthorised constructions and colonies by holding that they are entitled to supply of electricity, in our view can only lead to resutls which are disastrous in the long term. THE view, we are enclined to take is well buttressed by the observations of the Full Bench in AIR 1982 Punjab and Haryana 301 ''Ram Puri v. Chief Commissioner, Chandigarh'' and AIR 1983 Punjab and Haryana 340 ''Hardum Singh and Another v. State of Punjab''. 14. To conclude it has to be necessarily held that Section 29 of the Electricity Supply Act does not in the least warrant the supply of electricity to unauthorised urban colonies. It is manifest that the appellant-Board has no obligation to provide connections therein and consequently the residents thereof cannot claim consumer status within this jurisdiction. 15. Once the aforesaid conclusion is arrived at, it is manifest that the main plank of the order of the District Forum must fall and the same becomes wholly unsustainable. We are consequently, constrained to allow the appeal and set aside the said order and dismiss the complaint preferred by the respondent. Nevertheless we would refrain to burden the consumer with any costs. Appeal allowed.