Abdul Salam v. Bses Yamuna Power Ltd.

$~7 *

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ W.P.(C) 7851/2021 & CM APPL. 47515/2022 ABDUL SALAM .....Petitioner Through:

Mr. R.N. Dubey and Mr. Himanshu, Advocates.

versus BSES YAMUNA POWER LTD.

.....Respondent Through:

Mr. Manish Srivastava, Mr. Moksh Arora and Mr. Santosh Ramdurg, Advocates

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT BANSAL

O R D E R

% 17.02.2026 1.

The petitioner seeks a direction to the respondent to grant a new electricity connection in the name of the petitioner. Counsel for the petitioner submits that when petitioner had filed this petition, fresh applications were not being accepted by the respondent. However, the application has now been accepted, but the fate of the application is not yet known.

2.

The request of the petitioner for separate electricity connection has already been rejected by a speaking order dated 6th September, 2021 as noted in the order passed on 13th September, 2021. The aforesaid order has not been challenged by the petitioner.

3.

The electricity connection was granted in the name of respondent no.3, Mustkeem, who is the brother of the petitioner. The electricity W.P.(C) 7851/2021 The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 20/02/2026 at 13:11:50

connection was disconnected on account of non-payment of electricity bills by the respondent no.3.

4.

Vide order dated 28th February, 2022, it was noted that the petitioner, without prejudice to his contentions, shall deposit the entire electricity dues of Rs.80,000/- so that electricity supply can be restored forthwith. 5.

In the order passed by this Court on 12th July, 2023, it was specifically noted that the electricity connection has been restored pursuant to the order dated 28th February, 2022 and the petitioner has deposited a sum of Rs.80,000/-. It is an undisputed position that the electricity connection is active as on date.

6.

The only outstanding dispute is that the petitioner claims return of the proportionate amount of Rs.80,000/- paid by the petitioner. 7.

In my considered view, this is a matter pertaining to inter se dispute between the petitioner and the respondents no.2 and 3 and cannot be adjudicated in the present writ petition.

8.

Accordingly, the present writ petition is disposed of. AMIT BANSAL, J FEBRUARY 17, 2026 Vivek/- W.P.(C) 7851/2021 The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 20/02/2026 at 13:11:50