Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jharkhand · body

2025 DAILYLAW 25635 (JHR)

SATYA NARAYAN KUMAR v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND

WPC/5224/2025 · 2025-09-22

Rajesh Kumar

Writ Petition (Civil)body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

2025:JHHC:29246 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(C) No.5224 of 2025 ---- Satya Narayan Kumar, aged about 40 years, Son of Late Vishnu Ram @ Vishnu Sahu, resident of Vishnu Colony, Argora Bye Pass Chowk, P.O Doranda, P.S- Argora, District-Ranchi, Jharkhand …. …. Petitioner -Versus- 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. Jharkhand Bijli Vitran Nigam Limited (JBVNL) through it’s Electrical Executive Engineer, 2nd Floor, Sainik Market, Main Road, Ranchi, P.O GPO, P.S. Sadar, District-Ranchi, Jharkhand 3. Jharkhand Bijli Vitran Nigam Limited (JBVNL) through its Assistant Electrical Engineer, Electiricity Supply Sub-Division, Ashok Nagar, Ranchi, P.O Doranda, P.S. Argora, District-Ranchi, Jharkhand 4. Circle Officer Argora, Ranchi, P.O Doranda, P.S. Argora, District-Ranchi, Jharkhand 5. Jyoti Beng, aged about 52 years daughter of Patrik Munda, resident of Sangrampur, Boreya Road, P.O-Boreya, P.S Kanke, District-Ranchi, Jharkhand ` …. …. Respondents ---- CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR ---- For the Petitioner : Mr. Birendra Kumar, Advocate For the State : Mr. Zaid Imam, AC to SC-VII For the JUVNL : Mr. Manoj Kumar, Sr. S.C. ---- 03/Dated: 22nd September, 2025 1. Heard the parties. 2. The present writ petition has been filed for following relief:- “1. To quash and set-aside the notice contained in memo no.1310 dated 19- 07-2025 (Annexure-3) issued by respondent no.3, whereby and whereunder, it is stated that as per the letter of Circle Officer, Argora, Ranchi contained in memo no.543(ii), dated 15-07-2025, it is reported that private respondent no.5 happens to be the owner of the land, situate at mauza-Argora, Khata No.199, Plot No.1734, area-10 Katha and, therefore, the petitioner was directed to put his case within 7 days of the receipt of the impugned notice, otherwise, the electricity connection would be subject to disconnection. b. To direct respondent Nos. 2 and 3 to immediately and forthwith restore the electricity connection in favour of the petitioner, electricity connection, which stood disconnected by cutting down the main electric supply wire from the pole, without informing the petitioner and without giving him the opportunity of being heard, and without considering his representation dated 01-08-2025, 2025:JHHC:29246 filed by the petitioner, in pursuant to the impugned notice dated 19-07-2025 (Aminexure-3), and thereby rendering his entire building into darkness, causing him irreparable loss and violating his fundamental rights to live with dignity. C. To direct the respondents to adequately compensate the petitioner in terms of money for illegally and arbitrarily disconnecting the electricity supply from the pole, as this electricity disconnection has tempered the dignity and goodwill of the petitioner in society, causing him irreparable loss, as without any fault, and without any reasonable grounds, the respondents Nos.2 and 3 have illegally disconnected the electricity supply in the house of the petitioner. d. To hold and declare that respondent nos. 2 and 3 have no jurisdiction to decide the title over the lands in question and the simply because the land over which the building is standing is mutated in favour of someone else, does not confer jurisdiction over them to make electricity disconnection, as the subject matter of electricity disconnection is governed under Jharkhand Electricity Act and Rules made thereunder, and the grounds of disconnection are mainly, none payment of dues, electricity theft, exceeding sanctioned load etc., but mutation in favour of someone else is never a ground for electricity disconnection. e. Pending final hearing of this application, the respondents be directed to immediately and forthwith restore electricity connection in favour of the petitioner.” 3. It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the electricity connection of the petitioner has been restored. At present, no cause of action survives. 4. In the absence of any cause of action, the present writ petition is not maintainable. However, the petitioner is at liberty to work out his remedy in accordance with law, if any cause of action arises in future. 5. With the above observation and direction, the present writ petition is hereby, disposed of. (Rajesh Kumar, J.) 22nd September, 2025 Raja/- Uploaded 2. W.P.C No.5224 of 2025