17.09.2026 Item No.19 (DL) Court No.7 AJ. IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTION W.P.A. 19971 of 2026 Dilip Kumar Chakraborty -Vs- The State of West Bengal & Ors. Mr. Syed Shamsul Arefin. … for the petitioner. Ms. Suvasree Ghose. ….for the WBSEDCL. Mr. Rudraman Bhattacharyya, Sr. Adv., Mrs. Aparna Samanta (Kumar). ….for the State. 1. The petitioner alleges arbitrary action on the part of the respondent WBSEDCL Authorities in not effecting electricity supply at the petitioner’s residential premises despite application therefor having been made. 2. The State is represented through Mr. Bhattacharyya, learned senior Advocate. 3. Report in the form of affidavit had been filed by the respondent WBSEDCL Authorities on September 07, 2026 when the matter was taken up last. The said report reveals that the petitioner is already enjoying supply at the relevant premises through an electricity connection which stands in the petitioner’s name himself. Since the petitioner himself has applied for another connection at the same premises, the same prima facie appears 2 to be a case seeking to split the load to obtain the benefit of lower slab. 4. In case, an application for new electricity connection is rejected by the distribution licensee on the ground of splitting of load, there is a statutory forum available to the aggrieved applicant. 5. In such cases the Regional Grievance Redressal Officer is the authority to be approached in terms of Regulation 14 of the West Bengal Electricity Regulatory Commission (Recovery of Expenditure for Providing New Connections) Regulations, 2013. 6. The said regulation further provides that in cases where an application for grant of electricity is rejected on the ground of splitting of load, the onus would be on the applicant to show that the application is not for splitting of load. It has not been disputed that the petitioner indeed having an electricity connection at the same premises. 7. In such view of the matter, no mandatory order can be passed on this writ petition. However since the WBSEDCL Authorities have rejected the petitioner’s application, therefore, the petitioner will be entitled to refund of the amount paid by the petitioner to the WBSEDCL for the purpose of 3 seeking electricity supply from the WBSEDCL Authorities. Accordingly, the WBSEDCL Authorities will refund the amount paid by the petitioner for the said purpose within a period of two weeks from date. 8. The petitioner will be free to approach the Regional Grievance Redressal Officer for redressal of his grievance as regards new connection in terms of Regulation 14 as aforesaid. 9. WPA 19971 of 2026 stands disposed of. No costs. 10. Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties subject to compliance with all requisite formalities. (Om Narayan Rai, J.)