The petitioner is seeking direction for restoration of the connection provided in the premises allegedly kept by him, in building No.PIV/567 of Pambakuda Village, having Con. No.12961. Inter alia the petitioner seeks for a declaration that insistence for obtaining consent from the 4th respondent is not required for the petitioner to apply for electric connection in the said premises.
2. Brief facts of the case is that the petitioner claimed tenancy over the building in question to which the 4th respondent is the land lady. There is a criminal case registered against the 4th respondent as Crime No.285/2013 of Ramamangalam Police station, in which petitioner is the defacto complainant. The allegation in the said case is that the 4th respondent, with an intention to evict the petitioner from the shop room wherein he was conducting electronic shop, had trespassed into room and demolished the lock and committed theft of amounts kept in the room and further locked the room with a new lock. The investigating team opened the room and made an inventory. Subsequently, in an application filed by the petitioner under Section 457 Cr.P.C, the Magistrate Court had issued an order directing the investigating team to remove the lock and key and to permit the petitioner to conduct business therein. The said order passed by the Magistrate Court, was confirmed in Ext.P1 order passed by this court while dismissing a revision petition filed by the 4th respondent.
3. In the meanwhile, the electric connection in the premises was disconnected by respondents 2 & 3 at the instances of the 4th respondent. The petitioner submitted a request for re-connection which was rejected through Ext.P6. Challenging the reasons mentioned in Ext.P6, the petitioner seeks appropriate direction to get the electric supply restored.
4. Heard; Standing Counsel appearing for respondents 1 to 3. On a perusal of Ext.P6 it is evident that the petitioner sought for re-connection basing his claim on Ext.P1 order passed by this court. But the 3rd respondent found that this court has expressed nothing about the electric connection in the shop room in question, and the authorities of the 1st respondent are not parties in the writ petition. It is mentioned in Ext.P6 that the 4th respondent is a registered consumer, and that the electric connection was dismantled only on the basis of her request.Further it is mentioned that, before dismantling the connection, the room in question remained closed for about 6 months and the supply remained disconnected. It is also mentioned that the petitioner had not produced any document to show that he is the tenant in occupation of the said room. It is further mentioned in Ext.P6 that if the petitioner applies for connection by producing requisite documents the electric connection will be restored.
5. From the facts enumerated as above, it is evident that the claim of the petitioner is in his capacity as tenant of the premises in question. The allegation is basically of the nature that the landlord had deprived amenity of electric supply in the premises in question. Going by provisions contained in the Kerala Building (Lease & Rent Control) Act, 1965 the petitioner has got a remedy to approach the Accommodation Controller seeking restoration of the amenity. Apart from that if the petitioner desires to have a fresh electric connection in the premises in his capacity as occupant/tenant of the premises, he has to apply for such connection by fulfilling formalities prescribed under Regulation 14 of the KSEB Terms and Conditions of Supply 2005. If the petitioner fulfills such conditions to the satisfaction of the 3rd respondent, the electric connection can be provided without insisting on any consent from the landlady. However it is for the 3rd respondent to take an appropriate decision on the basis of such application considering the relevant provisions.
6. At any rate, challenge in this writ petition cannot succeed as the petitioner has no locus standi to apply for reconnection of supply, to which the 4th respondent is the registered consumer. The connection was dismantled on the basis of request made by her in the capacity as registered consumer. Therefore the writ petition fails ad the same is liable to be dismissed.
7. In the result the writ petition is dismissed, without prejudice to rights of the petitioner to invoke appropriate remedy as mentioned above, either by approaching the Accommodation Controller or by seeking fresh electric connection in the premises, provided it is satisfied that the petitioner is in occupation of the room in the capacity as tenant.
AMG/Pmn Sd/-
C.K. ABDUL REHIM JUDGE True copy P.A. to Judge