Sahinder Rajak vs C.E.S.C. Limited & Ors.

Pursuant to my order dated May 7, 2018, a further attempt was made by the writ petitioner to effect service on the private respondent at his address

mentioned in the cause title. From the affidavit of service filed today, which is kept on record, it appears that the item was attempted to be delivered

but even on intimations being made, the addressee was absent. It is, therefore, clear that the addressee, being the respondent no.4, is avoiding service.

Hence, I hold service to have been effected in accordance with law and the respondent no.4 is deliberately avoiding to come before this Court. The

respondent no.4 is set ex parte.

The case of the writ petitioner is that he is not getting installation of a fresh meter, as a result whereof he has not been able to avail of the supply of

the electricity. A case has been made out on record that he has complied with all formalities and the respondent distribution-licensee has also issued

quotation and attempted to give supply of electricity to the writ petition by installing a fresh meter. The distribution-licensee could not do so because

the common meter room of which the lock is retained by respondent no.4 continued to remain under lock and key. This is because the fourth

respondent is not cooperating with writ petitioner or the distribution-licensee.

Under the Electricity Act, 2003, the respondent no.4 even if he is the landlord, has no right to obstruct the distribution-licensee from having access to

the common meter room. Therefore, his acts and culpable inactions amount to not merely preventing the distribution-licensee from discharging its

statutory duties but also deprivation of the writ petitioner’s right at electricity. This is not merely a statutory duty under Section 43 of the Electricity

Act, 2003 but also deprives the writ petitioner of his right to live with dignity.

I say this because in today’s world, an essential utility such as electricity must be held to be a part of the right to life, indeed, right to live the

dignity. By reason of the aforesaid, however unwillingly, the respondent distribution-licensee is depriving the writ petitioner of his rights guaranteed

under Article 21 of the Constitution of India without following the procedure established by law and/or due process.

Accordingly, I dispose of the present writ petition by directing that a date for installation of electric meter to be intimated by the distribution-licensee to

the respondent no.5 and the writ petitioner. The respondent no.5 shall make available sufficient number of armed police personnel on the date fixed for

installation of meter such that the distribution-licensee can in their presence break open the padlock/lock and key of the common meter room at 118,

Deshbandhu road, Kolkata-700032 and shall install a fresh meter thereat in the name of the writ petitioner and shall supply electricity to the writ

petitioner through such meter. In case there is any resistance by the respondent no.4 or any other person, the police, on contingent referred to above,

must use all necessary force short of that which would cause loss of life in order to see that the order of this Court as passed today be given effect to.

The entire exercise shall be completed within a period of 14 days from the date of communication of this order including the time taken by the

distribution-licensee to communicate this order to the police authorities along with the date on which the distributionlicensee proceeds to effect such

installation. The Officer-in-Charge and the distribution-licensee shall be entitled to act on the website copy of this order without waiting for the

certified copy of this order. Since the fourth respondent is set ex parte, he need not be served with this order. There will be no order as to costs.