Authority: Calcutta High Court (High Court at Calcutta)

Order Date: 19.08.2026

Case Overview

  • Parties: CESC Limited (Petitioner No.1) vs. The Ombudsman (Petitioner No.2) with Kolkata Municipal Corporation (KMC) and a private stall holder (Respondent No.2) as intervenors.
  • Nature of Proceeding: Writ Petition (WPA 1299 of 2009) challenging the Ombudsman’s order dated 11 December 2008 directing CESC to provide a direct electricity meter to the private stall holder in S.S. Hogg Market, Kolkata.
  • Background: The stall holder applied for a separate commercial meter and a load of 17 kW on 27 February 2007. The request was not resolved by KMC or CESC, leading the respondent to approach the Ombudsman under Section 42(6) of the Electricity Act, 2003. The Ombudsman ordered CESC to effect direct meter supply within 30 days and report compliance within 15 days.
  • CESC’s Argument: Supplying individual meters in the congested S.S. Hogg Market is technically infeasible and poses fire‑safety hazards; electricity is already supplied through a block meter in the name of KMC. CESC cited Regulation 19 of the West Bengal Electricity Regulatory Commission (Recovery of Expenditure for Providing New Connection) Regulations, 2005, and Regulation 18 of 2013, which permit block‑meter supply in congested premises.
  • KMC’s Position: KMC has not objected to the private respondent receiving additional load via the existing block meter/sub‑meter and can enhance the load to 17 kW upon application.
  • Ombudsman’s Reasoning: Found no specific bar to providing a separate meter; noted that CESC had already supplied separate meters to other shop owners and that the private respondent’s load requirement could be met without fire‑hazard concerns.
  • Court’s Reasoning: Quoted Regulation 18 of 2013 and Regulations 18 & 19 of 2005, emphasizing that these provisions are enabling, allowing block‑meter supply where segregation is impracticable and fire risk exists. The court found that technical feasibility and safety considerations preclude a separate meter for the private respondent. It also noted that the private respondent can seek load enhancement through KMC’s block‑meter arrangement.

Final Outcome

  • The Ombudsman’s order dated 11 December 2008 is set aside.
  • CESC is not required to provide a direct individual meter to the private stall holder.
  • The private respondent is free to apply to KMC for a 17 kW load increase via the existing block‑meter/sub‑meter system, with KMC to consider the application in consultation with CESC.
  • The petition is disposed of without costs; parties may act on the server copy of the judgment.

Topics: Electricity Supply, Regulatory Compliance