HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - C No. - 32012 of 2025 Court No. - 1 HON'BLE NEERAJ TIWARI, J. HON'BLE VIVEK KUMAR SINGH, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondents. 2. Present writ petition has been filed seeking following reliefs:- "(i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari calling for the records of the case and quashing the rejection order dated 05.06.2025 (Annexure No. 1 to the writ petition) passed by the Sub-Divisional Officer-1/Junior Engineer Jangiroad rejecting the Application, bearing no. J0360292701, seeking grant of fresh electricity connection. (ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the Respondent Authority to consider the Application preferred by the petitioner afresh and grant him electricity connection since he is in settled possession over the "property in question"." 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is living in one portion of House No. 733 (Old No. 82), Mukeri Bazar, Pansari Bara, District Mirzapur (hereinafter referred to as "property in question") and remaining portion is being used by Smt. Rajni Modanwal (sister-in-law of the petitioner). It is further submitted that two civil suits are going on between petitioner and Smt. Rajni Modanwal. The petitioner applied for fresh electricity connection in his portion, supported with necessary documents and requisite fee, however, respondent no. 4- Sub-Divisional Officer, Purvanchal Vidyut Vitran Nigam Limited, DLW Bhikaripur, Varanasi, rejected the application in arbitrary manner on the ground that the petitioner has failed to submit any document of tile over the "property in question". It is further submitted that "property in question" is ancestral property of the petitioner, wherein he had right by birth. 4. We have considered the submission advanced by the parties. Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Shreyas Srivastava Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Krishna Agarawal, Sushil Kumar Pandey Nageshwar Modanwal .....Petitioner(s) State Of Uttar Pradesh And 4 Others .....Respondent(s) 5. All that is required for supply company to ascertain is whether the petitioner for electricity connection is in settled possession of premises in which connection is to be given. This view was taken by the Full Bench of the Calcutta High Court in judgment dated 11.02.2011 passed in Abhimanyu Mazumdar vs. The Superintending Engineer, reported in AIR 2011 Cal64, wherein it was held as follows:- "Since all the lands in these Islands belong to the Union of India, the latter is not required to file a civil suit for eviction of a trespasser and the trespassers can be evicted by taking recourse to the Regulation of 1966. However, so long such a trespasser in settled possession is not so evicted, he should be entitled to get electricity with the aid of Section 43 of the Electricity Act on compliance of the terms of supply as provided under law. It is needless to mention that the enjoyment of such electricity will not confer any right or equity in favour of the trespasser in occupation to defeat the title of the lawful owner." (emphasis supplied) 6. We are of the considered view that in case the petitioner is permanently living in the "property in question" and there is no electricity connection in the portion of the house or building occupied by the petitioner, then the request of the petitioner for grant of new electricity connection in his portion should be considered, provided the petitioner fulfills requirement for the new electricity connection and gives security amount, requisite fee etc. The concerned respondents shall consider the case of the petitioner for grant of new electricity connection in the light of observations made hereinabove within a period of three weeks from the date of service of certified copy of this order. If the respondents feel necessary, then they may make spot inspection of the portion of the "property in question" where the petitioner is residing to ascertain that there is no electricity connection in his portion and he requires a new electricity connection. 7. With the above observations, writ petition is disposed of. October 6, 2025 A.P. Pandey WRIC No. 32012 of 2025 2 (Vivek Kumar Singh,J.) (Neeraj Tiwari,J.) Digitally signed by :- ANAND PRAKASH PANDEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad