IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA CWP No. 11817 of 2025 Decided on 24th July, 2025 Sh. Surinder Kumar …Petitioner Versus Municipal Corporation Shimla and others …Respondent Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge 1Whether approved for reporting? For the petitioner: Mr. Vishal Mohan, Senior Advocate, with M/s Ashwani K. Lal, Praveen Sharma and Rajeev Kumar, Advocates. For the respondent: Mr. Mukul Sood, Advocate, for respondents No.1 and 2. Ms. Sunita Sharma, Senior Advocate, with Mr. Dhananjay Sharma, Advocate, for respondents No.3 and 4. Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge (Oral) Issue notice. Mr. Mukul Sood and Mr. Dhananjay Sharma, Advocates, accept notice on behalf of respondents No.1 and 2 and respondents No.3 and 4, respectively. 2. Though, Learned Senior Counsel for the Electricity Board submits that there is no record available with the 2 Electricity Board as to whether the connection in the premises was installed in the 90s, as the record was gutted in fire. 3. Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner has made available for the perusal of the Court certain electricity bills paid by Surinder Kumar relatable to the said property, perusal whereof demonstrates that the same relate to the year 1993-95 and thereafter. 4. In these circumstances, taking into consideration that the electricity meter was installed in the premises of the petitioner long time back, these proceedings are disposed of with the direction that the respondent-Board shall forthwith restore the electricity connection of the petitioner, but, as there is a Civil dispute going on between the petitioner and certain private individuals, who are not before this Court, the order that has been passed by the Court today in favour of the petitioner shall not create any equity in his favour as far as the said Civil proceedings are concerned and, because, the petitioner has already moved an appropriate application under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 of the CPC seeking injunction including non- disconnection of the electricity connection, the restoration of the 3 electricity that has been ordered by this Court shall be subject to the order that may be passed by the learned Civil Suit in the said proceedings. It is further clarified that the learned Civil Suit shall decide the application that is pending for adjudication on its own merit uninfluenced by any observation made by this Court. (Ajay Mohan Goel) Judge July 24, 2025 (Vinod)