Suit For Mandatory Injunction For Restoration Of Electricity Dismissed On Ground Of Alternative Remedy, No Bar To File Petition U/A 226: Delhi HC

The Delhi High Court has observed that a civil suit filed by a party seeking mandatory injunction for restoration of electricity having been dismissed on the ground of an alternative remedy will not debar such party from filing a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

Justice Sanjeev Sachdeva reiterated that electricity is one the Fundamental Rights for existence and is protected under Article 21 of the Constitution of India, subject to the party complying with other requirements.

The Court was dealing with a plea seeking directions on Tata Power Delhi Distribution Limited (TPDDL) to either restore the electricity supply or install a fresh connection in the property in question.

It was the case of the petitioner that he was a tenant in the property, though there were certain disputes between him and the landlord.

It was thus submitted on behalf of the petitioner that he had filed a suit for mandatory injunction seeking restoration of electricity connection. However, the said suit was rejected on the ground that there was a suit for possession filed by the landlord against the property and the relief of restoration of electricity could be agitated in the said proceedings.

On the other hand, the counsel appearing for the TPDDL submitted that respondents had no objection in granting electricity connection in the name of the petitioner, provided that he clears the pending electricity dues, if any, and further makes a fresh application for grant of a connection in his name, subject to payment of additional security deposit over and above the regular security deposit.

Issuing notice on the plea, the Court observed:

"The civil suit filed by the petitioner seeking mandatory injunction for restoration of electricity having been dismissed on the ground of an alternative remedy will not debar him from filing a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India as it is a settled proposition of law that electricity is one the Fundamental Rights for existence and protected under Article 21 of the Constitution of India, subject to the petitioner complying with other requirements."

The Court ordered that the petitioner shall make an application for grant of a fresh electricity connection in his own name. It also added that the Respondent shall process petitioner's application for installation of a fresh electricity connection without insisting on a NOC from the owner.

The Court said that the Respondent shall be entitled to disconnect the electricity supply in case petitioner fails to pay the electricity charges.

It also directed that the application of the petitioner shall be processed and electricity connection shall be installed within two working days of the petitioner completing all the formalities.

"It is clarified that this order is without prejudice to the rights and contentions of the parties and shall not be construed as recognising any tenancy or possessory rights of the petitioner with regard to the subject property and would be without prejudice to the pending dispute with the landlord. No special equities shall flow in favour of the Petitioner because of this order," the Court said.

Accordingly, the plea was disposed of.

Case Title: ASHISH GUPTA v. TATA POWER DELHI DISTRIBUTION LIMITED

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 120

Click Here To Read Order