W.P.(C)/8110/2025 of SWATI SAISTA Vs BSES RAJDHANI POWER LIMITED & ORS. on 7 October 2026

O R D E R

%

07.10.2026

1. By virtue of the present writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner, inter alia, seeks directions to provide individual electricity connection at the petitioner’s residence situated at Flat No. B-503, Meghdoot Apartment, Plot - 19, Sector-7, Dwarka, New Delhi-110 075 (subject property).

2. At the outset, Ms. Isha Khanna, Advocate, who was appointed as an ‘amicus curiae’ for and on behalf of the petitioner vide order dated 25.05.2026 seeks discharge from the present proceedings. As such, Ms. Isha Khanna, ‘amicus curiae’ is discharged from the present matter.

3. Petitioner appearing in person submits that she is well prepared to proceed with the arguments by herself and does not need any assistance of any lawyer. She submits that amongst the various reliefs sought by her in the present petition, she seeks to confine her prayer to the issue qua connection of electricity.

4. It is the case of the petitioner that due to a marital dispute between the petitioner and her husband/ respondent no.10 (being the registered owner of the subject property), the husband/ respondent no.10 of the petitioner has since moved out therefrom and has not been paying the electricity dues on account of which the society/ respondent no. 2, had disconnected the electricity connection qua the subject property since and from 15.11.2022.

5. In view thereof, the petitioner submits that she comes within the ambit of a “consumer” in terms of the Electricity Act, 2003 (EA), and thus is entitled to a direct/ individual electricity connection under Regulation 12(1) of the Delhi Electricity Regulatory Commission (Supply Code and Performance Standards) Regulations, 2017 (DERC Regulations) which guarantees the right of individual residents to secure a direct supply of electricity. Thus, the petitioner prays that the present petition be allowed.

6. At the outset, this Court is apprised that it is an undisputed fact that the present petition is the fifth round of litigation by the very same petitioner against the very same respondents, wherein she is claiming the very same/ similar relief(s). For the sake of clarity, the details of the previous litigations are reproduced herein as under:- S. No. Case No. Status

1. W.P.(CRL.) 2591/2023 Dismissed Delhi High Court: 20.09.2023

2. W.P.(CRL.) 512/2023 Dismissed Delhi High Court: 04.12.2023

3. W.P.(CRL.) 104/2024 Dismissed Delhi High Court: 01.07.2024

4. SLP(CRL.) 12248/2024 Dismissed Hon’ble Supreme Court: 18.10.2024

7. In fact, it is worthwhile to point out that a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in W.P.(Crl.) 2591/2023 vide judgment dated 20.09.2023, wherein the petitioner had sought similar reliefs, dismissed the same whilst recording as under:- “5. The counsel for the respondent no.7 stated that the respondent no.7 has granted CGHS connection in the name of the respondent no.5 and in turn, the respondent no.5 is providing electricity connection to the occupants of the different flats in the society. The respondent no.7 is not directly responsible for disconnection of the electricity of the flat of the petitioner.

6. The counsel for the respondent no.5 stated that the arrears of electricity charges amounting to Rs.22,112/- upto August, 2023 have not been paid despite issuance of reminders notice dated 16.09.2023 bearing no.MC 23- 24/109.

7. The petitioner on specifically being asked whether she is ready to pay the arrears of electricity charges on that she stated that her husband, Dhirender Kumar/respondent no.6 is liable to pay the electricity bill and as she is in the occupation of the flat, the respondent no.5 and 7 be directed to restore the electricity supply in the flat in question.

8. The petitioner is in occupation of the flat in question and as on August, 2023, a sum of Rs.22,112/- is still outstanding in respect of the flat in question which has not been paid despite notice dated 16.09.2023. As the electricity charges have not been paid either by the registered consumer or by occupier in that eventuality, the respondent no.5 is not obliged to restore the electricity supply in the flat in question. The petitioner is not entitled for the relief as prayed for. Hence, the present petition along with pending application is dismissed.”

8. Thereafter, once again a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in W.P.(CRL) 104/2024 on 01.07.2024, whilst dealing with similar reliefs as is sought herein by the very same petitioner, further held as under:- “16. Therefore, the Coordinate Bench has taken note of the fact that that BRPL has granted connection in the name of the housing society and in turn, the society is providing electricity connection to the occupants of the different flats in the society, and BRPL is not directly responsible for disconnection of the electricity of the flat of the petitioner. The Bench has further categorically held that respondent no. 5 i.e. the housing society is not obliged to restore the electricity supply in the flat in question since the petitioner has not paid the due amount towards electricity bill i.e. Rs.

22,112/- despite notices/reminders. The statement of petitioner has also been recorded wherein she has refused to pay the bill and has rather stated that her husband is liable to pay the same. xxx

20. Therefore, this Court is of the view that insofar as prayers (a) and (b) of the present petition are concerned, the same have already been decided by the Coordinate Bench vide order dated 20.09.2023, which has not been challenged by the petitioner. Furthermore, a petition seeking similar reliefs was then filed by the petitioner before the Hon’ble Apex Court under Article 32 of the Constitution of India, was dismissed vide order dated 04.12.2023.22. xxx

22. The status report filed on record by respondent no. 7 i.e. BRPL reveals that in terms of Regulation 12 of the Delhi Electricity Regulatory Commission (Supply Code and Performance Standards) Regulations, 2017, it provides single point supply to the Group Housing Societies, which thereafter, are responsible for providing supply to individual beneficiaries and collect tariff from them. Thus, the Group Housing Society, which in the present case is Meghdoot Housing Society, is responsible for providing supplies to the individual beneficiaries, including the present petitioner. The counter affidavit filed on behalf of respondent no. 5, i.e. Meghdoot Cooperative Group Housing Society, confirms the said position. It is further mentioned therein that the petitioner has not paid her electricity bills despite various reminders by the society. A perusal of the electricity bills filed on record reveals that arrears of electricity charges, as of May 2024, are about Rs. 30,000/-. Therefore, the Coordinate Bench has already held in order dated 20.09.2023 that the housing society cannot be directed to restore the electricity connection sans the payment of due amount towards electricity bills, which has not been challenged till date.”

9. In this backdrop, since the petitioner has been unable to show any change in circumstances, she cannot be permitted to reagitate the very same issues and/ or raise the very same ground to seek the very same reliefs which have already been dismissed by various orders on merits passed by the Co-ordinate Benches of this Court. Moreove, whence the petitioner herself agrees that none of them are under challenge before this Court, and thus they are all final and binding upon the petitioner herein for all purposes.

10. As such, the aforesaid do not inspire any confidence for this Court to grant the reliefs sought in the present petition.

11. In view of the foregoing, the present petition, alongwith the pending applications, is dismissed with no orders as to costs.

SAURABH BANERJEE, J OCTOBER 7, 2026/Ab