Smti.V.Kavitha v. The Superintending Engineer And ORS.

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA

[ CIRCUIT BENCH AT PORT BLAIR ] *** WPA/285/2025 Smt V. Kavitha Vs.

The Superintending Engineer and others Mr. S. Sasi Kumar ... for the petitioner Mr. S.C.Mishra ... for the respondents October 28, 2025 [SR] Item No. 7 The petitioner applied for new connection on the ground that he is in settled possession of the premises bearing survey plot no.25/P measuring around 100 sq.mtrs at Dollygunj Village, South Andaman District.

Mr. S.C.Mishra, learned advocate for the electricity authority submits that upon an inspection being made on the concerned premises, it was found that one Mr.Anand Babu was already enjoying electricity through a meter bearing No.G/486 in the same premises. The petitioner was enjoying electricity through the said meter.

Petitioner's contention is that the said meter belongs to another person and the fact that he has been in possession of the property for so long entitles him to a separate connection. There was no commonality of interest and common mess between the petitioner and Mr. Anand Babu.

Having heard the rival contention of the parties, the writ petition is disposed of directing the concerned Assistant Engineer, Electricity Department, respondent no. 2, to make an enquiry with regard to the contentions of the petitioner, hear out the petitioner and Mr. Anand Babu, specially on the issue whether the petitioner would be in a position to enjoy electricity from the said meter, which has been connected to the premises in Mr. Anand Babu's name. The application of the petitioner shall be processed in accordance with law.

Needless to mention, a reasoned order shall be passed and communicated to the petitioner and if it is found that the petitioner is entitled to a separate meter, because the petitioner and Anand Babu are neither connected nor related to each other in anyway, connection shall be given upon the petitioner complying with all requisite formalities. The entire exercise shall be completed within a period of 2 months from the date of communication of this order.

As no affidavit-in-opposition has been called for, the allegations made by the petitioner are deemed to be denied. Parties are to act in terms of the server copy of this order duly downloaded from the official website of this Hon'ble Court. ( Shampa Sarkar, J. )