Sukumar Roy v. Cesc Ltd And ANR

10th April, (AK) W.P.A 2131 of 2024 Sukumar Roy Vs.

CESC Limited and another Mr. Bidyut Kr. Halder Mr. Indranil Halder Ms. Neha Singh ...for the petitioner.

Mr. Brotindra Mullick Ms. Sreemoyee Mitra ...for the CESC Limited.

1.

The petitioner contends that the petitioner sought new domestic electricity connection.

2.

However, such connection was not given by the CESC Limited citing apprehended splitting of load. 3.

It is contended that there will be no splitting of load if the connection is given.

4.

Such contention is refuted by learned counsel for the CESC Limited who submits that the petitioner is already enjoying electricity connection standing at the premises in the name of his late mother. 5.

In any event, it would be pre-judging the issue if the court decides on the merits of the same, since it falls within the domain of the concerned Grievance Redressal Officer under the extant Regulations to decide such issues.

6.

Accordingly, WPA 2131 of 2024 is disposed of by granting liberty to the petitioner to approach the concerned Grievance Redressal Officer with the issues raised here.

7.

If so approached, the Grievance Redressal Officer shall decide all issues in accordance with law upon giving adequate hearing to all concerned, preferably within six weeks from the approach being made. 8.

There will be no order as to costs.

9.

Urgent photostat copies of this order, if applied for, be given to the parties upon compliance of all requisite formalities.

(Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya, J.)