Shri V.Veerappan v. The Superintending Engineer And ORS.

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA

CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTION APPELLATE SIDE [ CIRCUIT BENCH AT PORT BLAIR ] *** WPA/253/2023 Shri V. Veerappan Vs.

The Superintending Engineer and others Mr. Pardeshia Munda ... for the petitioner Mr. Tulsi Lall Mr. Rakesh Kumar ... for the respondents February 16, 2023 [SR] Item No.12 Heard learned counsel for the parties.

The petitioner is admittedly encroacher of government land belonging to the Union Territory of Andaman and Nicobar Islands. The petitioner is occupying the land by constructing dwelling house on the land in question. The grievance of the petitioner is that though the petitioner is in occupation of land as settler and dwelling on the alleged land by constructing dwelling house, the petitioner is not provided with electricity connection to facilitate ease of living.

The contention of the respondents is that as the petitioner is not title holder of the land, no electricity connection can be given to the petitioner.

Whether electricity connection can be given to a trespasser in settled possession of any species of government land is a question, which is no more res integra. The Full Bench of Calcutta High Court in the case of Abhimanyu

Mazumdar vs. Superintending Engineer 2011(2) CHN (Cal) 768 in similar matters pertaining to trespassers in settled possession of government land within the territory of Andaman and Nicobar Islands has already answered the question in affirmative. In paragraph 16 of the judgment, the Hon'ble Full Bench has held thus :- "16. Since all the lands in these Islands belong to the Union of India, the latter is not required to file a civil suit for eviction of a trespasser and the trespassers can be evicted by taking recourse to the Regulation of 1966. However, so long such a trespasser in settled possession is not so evicted, he should be entitled to get electricity with the aid of Section 43 of the Electricity Act on compliance of the terms of supply as provided under law. It is needless to mention that the enjoyment of such electricity will not confer any right or equity in favour of the trespasser in occupation to defeat the title of the lawful owner."

In view of the aforesaid ruling, the present writ petition is to be disposed of in the light of the order passed in the case of Abhimanyu Mazumdar (supra) and the writ petitioner is entitled to the benefit extended to the petitioner in the aforesaid case of Abhimanyu Mazumdar.

Accordingly, the respondents are directed to give electricity connection to the dwelling house of the petitioner, if such petitioner is found to be in settled possession of the premises in question subject to compliance of other formalities required under the Electricity Act, Rules and Regulations made thereunder.

Needless to mention here that the petitioner is entitled to the enjoyment of the electricity so long the petitioner is not dispossessed by the true owner i.e. the Appropriate Government by due process of law, and the petitioner cannot

claim any right either in equity or under law for conferment of title over the land, the petitioner is in settled possession of, on the ground that electricity supply has been given to the dwelling house of the petitioner. These conditions shall also binds the transferee/assignee and/or successor(s) in interest of the petitioner.

The electricity connection be provided to the petitioner, as per the application already filed (which is part of the writ petition) on compliance of requisite formalities, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of this order either through Court or through any other agency including the petitioner.

Accordingly, the writ petition, being WPA/253/2023 is disposed of.

( Chitta Ranjan Dash, J.)