SANJOY MONDAL SHYAMAL ROY vs CHAIRMAN, WEST BENGAL STATE ELECTRICITY DISTRIBUTION COMPANY LIMTED AND ORS. — WPA/8535/2026
Case under Electricity Act Section NA. Disposed: Contested--DISMISSED on 07th May 2026.
CNR: WBCHCA0163582026
Filing Number
WPA/8412/2026
Filing Date
06-Apr-2026
Registration No
WPA/8535/2026
Registration Date
06-Apr-2026
Judge
Hon'ble Justice Ravi Krishan Kapur
Coram
Hon'ble Justice Ravi Krishan Kapur
Bench Type
Single Bench
Category
GROUP A (WRIT MATTERS) ( 1 )
Sub-Category
Connection/Disconnection ( 1 )
Judicial Branch
MANDAMUS SECTION
Decision Date
07-May-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--DISMISSED
Last updated 03-Jun-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.SANJOY MONDAL SHYAMAL ROY
Respondent(s)
-
1.CHAIRMAN, WEST BENGAL STATE ELECTRICITY DISTRIBUTION COMPANY LIMTED AND ORS.
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
07-May-2026
Hon'ble Justice Ravi Krishan KapurView PDF
Case Summary: The High Court at Calcutta dismissed the writ petition of Sanjoy Mondal challenging the West Bengal State Electricity Distribution Company's refusal to provide an electricity connection for his submersible pump. The court upheld the company's action, noting that the petitioner had engaged in repeated electricity theft in 2024 and 2025 with outstanding dues remaining unpaid, and had failed to provide payment instructions for the remaining 50% of outstanding dues as directed. The court found no grounds to exercise discretion in favor of the petitioner given his history of repeated theft offenses. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
30-Apr-2026
Hon'ble Justice Ravi Krishan KapurView PDF
-
28-Apr-2026
New Motion
Hon'ble Justice Ravi Krishan Kapur
-
06-Apr-2026
Case filed
Registration No. WPA/8535/2026
Case Summary: The High Court at Calcutta dismissed the writ petition of Sanjoy Mondal challenging the West Bengal State Electricity Distribution Company's refusal to provide an electricity connection for his submersible pump. The court upheld the company's action, noting that the petitioner had engaged in repeated electricity theft in 2024 and 2025 with outstanding dues remaining unpaid, and had failed to provide payment instructions for the remaining 50% of outstanding dues as directed. The court found no grounds to exercise discretion in favor of the petitioner given his history of repeated theft offenses. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts