Smt. Budhi Kujur vs Superintending Engineer

Debi Prosad Dey, J.—The petitioner has filed this application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India being aggrieved by the inaction on the part of respondent No. 3 to provide electricity connection to the petitioner. The petitioner submitted an application before the respondent No. 3 Assistant Engineer, Electricity Department, Hut Bay, South Andaman for obtaining electricity connection. But the department concerned did not pay any heed to such application. The specific case of the petitioner is that the petitioner has encroached Government revenue land bearing survey No. 9, measuring an area of 1000 Sq. mtrs. situated at Hut Bay, under Little Andaman Tahsil. The petitioner has constructed a house on the said land and she has been residing thereon for considerable period of time. The possession of the petitioner over the land in question has become settled possession by efflux of time. The petitioner wanted to have electric connection in her residence, but her successive applications were either remaining unanswered or rejected by the concerned authority on the ground that the possession of the petitioner is not legal.

Finding no other alternative the petitioner has filed this application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for direction upon respondent No. 3 to provide electric connection to the petitioner in her present residence.

Learned advocate for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is entitled to get such electric connection in view of her settled possession over the encroached land. Learned advocate Mrs. Kavita Rao appearing on behalf of the respondents submits that the petitioner is definitely entitled to get electric connection in her present residence in view of her settled possession over the encroached land. Learned advocate appearing on behalf of the respondents referred a decision, reported in 2011 (2) CHN (Cal) 768 : (AIR 2011 Cal 64) (Abhimanyu Mazumdar v. The Superintending Engineer).

The Special Bench of our High Court has specifically decided that if the applicant is found to be in settled possession of the premises in that event the petitioner will be entitled to the enjoyment of the electricity so long the petitioner is not dispossessed by due process of law on compliance of all other formalities required under the Act. Relying on a number of decisions, the Special Bench has also described the meaning of ''settled possession''. On careful scrutiny of the writ petition I find that the petitioner has been residing thereon for a considerable period of time by encroaching upon Government revenue land and she has also constructed a house property thereon. The possession of the petitioner over the land in question appears to be settled possession. Moreover, learned advocate for the respondent has also admitted that in view of the decision referred to herein above, the petitioner is entitled to get electricity connection at her residence.

I would like to mention here that a direction to the respondent No. 3 for providing electric connection on usual terms and conditions to the petitioner on payment of necessary charges will in no way confer any title on the petitioner with regard to the land under question and she would be permitted to enjoy the electricity so long she is not dispossessed by due process of law by the authority concerned. It is needless to mention that all the lands in these islands belong to the Union of India and the petitioner may be evicted from the land encroached by her by taking recourse to the Regulation of 1966.

Be that as it may, respondent No. 3 is thus directed to provide electric connection to the petitioner within 12 weeks on usual terms and conditions and on payment of necessary charges for having such electric connection and the petitioner shall be paying necessary charges for consumption of electricity thereafter in accordance with the bills to be raised by concerned authority.

The writ petition is thus disposed of in terms of the aforesaid order.

No order as to costs.