The Madhya Pradesh High Court at Gwalior has directed electricity authorities to supply electricity to a woman occupying a family property. The Court held that electricity authorities need not resolve complex disputes over ownership or partition before considering an electricity connection application by an occupier. Justice Milind Ramesh Phadke allowed the woman's writ petition on September 24, 2026.
The petitioner claimed a 1/7th share in the house under a compromise reached in civil proceedings in which her mother was also a party. She was given a temporary domestic connection on August 20, 2025. It was disconnected a week later, after her mother complained that the connection had been obtained by suppressing facts and in violation of its terms.
The petitioner told the court that her children, who are in Classes IX and X, were struggling to study without electricity. The respondents argued that a connection could not be released unless she first established her right over the premises.
Justice Milind Ramesh Phadke held that electricity authorities were not required to decide complicated disputes over ownership, partition or the civil rights of the parties while considering an application for an electricity connection.
The Court observed:
“The electricity distribution authorities, while considering an application for electricity connection, are not required to adjudicate upon complicated questions relating to title, partition or inter se civil rights of the parties.”
The Court examined Section 43 of the Electricity Act, 2003, which provides for electricity supply to an owner or occupier upon a valid application and compliance with the applicable requirements. The Court compared Section 43 of the Electricity Act, 2003, with Section 12(6) of the Electricity Act, 1910, which defined an occupier, for the purposes of that provision, as a person in “lawful occupation.”
Explaining the significance of the change, the Court observed:
“A comparative reading of both the provisions shows that there is a conscious departure by the Parliament and the word ‘lawful’ specified in the Electricity Act, 1910, has been dropped by the Parliament in the Electricity Act of 2003. The deletion has to be viewed as a conscious act of the Parliament and not just an omission.”
The Court also considered earlier judicial decisions concerning electricity connections in cases involving disputed property rights. It recognised the petitioner’s right to claim an electricity connection as an occupier under Section 43, clarifying that its observations applied only for as long as she remained in possession of the premises.
The Court further observed:
“no-one, in the modern days can survive without electricity, and therefore, the right to electricity is also a right to life and liberty in terms of Article 21 of the Constitution of India.”
The High Court allowed the writ petition and directed the respondents to release an electricity connection at the premises where the petitioner was residing and in possession. The connection must be provided within seven days of receipt of a copy of the order, subject to compliance with the applicable norms.
Case Title: Smt. Preeti Sharma v. The State of Madhya Pradesh and Others
Case Number: Writ Petition No. 17709 of 2026
