2009 PLP 1358 (YLR)

Heard the learned counsel for the parties. Vide order dated 19-11-2007, the petitioner was directed to deposit "an amount payable by him towards electricity consumed during the period with the Nazir of this Court, who will deposit the same with the concerned department." The Nazir was further directed to take steps for restoration of the electricity of the petitioner "on deposit of all the dues outstanding against the petitioner". Learned counsel appearing for the respondents have raised the grievance that despite the specific direction issued to the petitioner to deposit all the outstanding dues towards consumption of the electricity, the petitioner failed to deposit all such dues arid instead, manoeuvred to get the instalments sanctioned from the concerned office of the K. E. S.C. whereby he is shown to have been allowed to clear the outstanding dues by means of payment in instalments. It is the case of respondent No.2 that the petitioner not only failed to make payment against the electricity consumption charges, pertaining to two separate connections installed in the disputed premises, but also is a defaulter in making payment of the monthly rent to the said respondent/landlord and further that further dues against water supply connection, gas connection as well as telephone connection have also not been cleared by the petitioner, and the respondent is likely to suffer irreparable loss and for all such purposes has approached the competent Court of law to seek the remedy, which may be available to him according to law. Learned counsel for the petitioner has admitted that the petitioner has only paid towards the amount of some of the instalments, which were allowed to be paid by him towards the entire outstanding dues and that the entire dues have not been paid by him; learned counsel has further admitted that the above quoted order dated 19-11-2007 is not complied with by the petitioner, whereby he was directed to "deposit the amount payable by him towards electricity consumed during the period with the Nazir of this Court who will deposit the same with the concerned department" and Nazir was issued further direction to take steps for restoration of electricity of the petitioner" on deposit of all the dues outstanding against the petitioner." On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the respondents have argued that the petition is not maintainable for the reason that all such disputes in between the licensor and licensee, regarding supply of the electricity connection are to be heard and decided by the competent Electric Inspector under section 24 of the Electricity Act, 1910 and that the petitioner having not exhausted such remedy, this Court cannot enter into the controversial disputes as to the extent of the dues outstanding against the petitioner and payable by him. Learned counsel have referred to the copies of the bills filed by them today, which indicate that the amounts shown outstanding against and payable by the petitioner are at variance than those shown by the petitioner. It appears that the controversy so entered upon by the parties is to be determined only by means of recording of evidence and in order to resolve such a controversy, the evidence necessary is needed to be recorded, which exercise cannot be undertaken by this Court while entertaining proceedings under Article 199 of the Constitution. The petition is hereby disposed of with the above-recorded observations, leaving the petitioner at liberty to approach the competent forum for the purpose of getting his grievances resolved. H.B.T./S-45/K Petition dismissed.