Delhi State Industrial And Infrastructure Development Corporation Ltd. (Dsiidc) v. Tata Power Delhi Distribution Co. Ltd And ANR.

$~60 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 11834/2018 and CM No. 45831/2018 DELHI STATE INDUSTRIAL AND INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD. (DSIIDC) ..... Petitioner Through Mr.

Avnish Ahlawat, Standing Counsel, GNCTD with Mr. Nitesh Kumar Singh, Ms. Tania Ahlawat, Ms. Deepali Gupta, Advocate and Ms. Palak Rohmetra, Advocates with Mr. Mukesh Kumar, Ex. Engineer versus TATA POWER DELHI DISTRIBUTION CO. LTD AND ANR. ..... Respondents Through Mr. Nikhil Sharma and Mr. Abhishek Pundir, Advocate for TPDDL/R-1 Mr. Dhananjaya Mishra and Mr.

Siddhart Buxy, Advocates for R-2

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KUMAR KAIT

O R D E R

% 31.10.2018 Vide the present petition the petitioner has prayed as under: a) To declare the action of the respondent no.1 as unjustified, arbitrary, and illegal in declining to provide electric connection to the industrial consumers of Bawana Industrial Area Phase-I unless monetary demand raised by them is met by DSIIDC/ Petitioner herein.

b) To direct the respondent no. To augment its electricity distribution system in Bawana Industrial Area Phase-I by incurring the further expenditure towards the 11kv system from its own sources and to provide electric connections to the industrial consumers in the said area.

c) Pass any such further order(s) as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in favour of the appellant in the facts and circumstances of the present case."

In the aforesaid petition the petitioner made the representation dated 28.02.2018 to the Principal Secretary (Power), Govt. Of NCT of Delhi, 8th Floor, Delhi Secretariat, New Delhi and the representation dated 26.02.2018 to Ms. Kiran Gupta, Head (CS & KCG), TPDDL, Cencare Building, opposite C-2 Block, Keshav Puram, Delhi. However, no replies were received from the said respondents. After hearing both the parties, I am of the view that the justice would be met if the respondents no.1 and 2 are directed to dispose of the writ petitions made by the petitioner.

Keeping in view the reasons stated in the writ petitions and submissions of both the parties, I hereby direct respondent no.1 to take decision for representation dated 26.02.2018, made by the petitioner within three weeks from the receipt of this order. Respondent no.2 is also directed to dispose of the representation dated 28.02.2018 made by the petitioner within three weeks from the receipt of this order.

I hereby made clear that no further extension of time shall be granted to the respondents for that purpose.

Petition is therefore disposed of.

Needless to state that if the petitioner is still aggrieved by the

decisions to be taken by the respondents, he may challenge the same before the appropriate court.

SURESH KUMAR KAIT, J OCTOBER 31, 2018 gb