← Library
Madras High CourtWP/3968/2010disposed of

E.Anbu v. The Chairman

2019-07-11Honourable Mr Justice M.Dhandapani2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF MADRAS

DATED: 11.07.2019

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI W.P.No.3968 of 2010 and W.M.P.No.1 of 2010 E.Anbu

...Petitioner

Vs 1.The Chairman, Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, Anna Salai, Chennai.

2.The Executive Engineer, (OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE) Chengai Electricity Distribution Division, Sriperumbuthur - 602 105.

...Respondents

PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a writ of certiorarified Mandamus, calling for records pertaining to the impugned communication of the second respondent dated 22.09.2009 bearing letter No.SEPO/E&P/THIRU/UPO/KO.MANU/A103/09 on the file of the second respondent and quash the same and consequently direct the second respondent either to restore or to give electricity supply to the petitioners agricultural lands admeasuring 1.09 acres comprised in Punjai Survey Nos:156/11B, 156/13A, 156/6B, 158/9, 179/3, in Melakudayiur Village, Thiruvallur Taluk, Thiruvallur District.

For Petitioner : Mr.C.Ravichandran For Respondent : Mr.S.K.Rameshuwar

O R D E R

The petitioner purchased a agricultural land admeasuring 1.09 acres comprised in Punjai Survey Nos.156/11B, 156/13A, 156/6B, 158/9, 179/3 in Melakundaiyur Village, Thiruvallur Taluk, Thiruvallur District under a registered sale deed dated 26.05.2004 from one Rukmaniammal and others and thereafter he made an application for reconnection of electricity on 12.07.2009, which was rejected by the 2nd respondent vide impugned communication dated 22.09.2009.

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

2.The learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents submitted that the petitioner defaulted in payment of electricity charges towards his agricultural electricity connection and hence, it was disconnected. A notice was sent to the petitioner under the scheme for reconnection of electricity supply on 13.09.1991. However, the petitioner did not renew his electricity connection within the stipulated time, i.e. 90 days. Even if it is renewed, it will be treated as a new connection. Hence, his application dated 12.02.2009 was rejected and the electricity connection remains disconnected. The petitioner is seeking renewal after a lapse of more than 8 years. The learned Standing Counsel submitted that the petitioner may be directed to pay the electricity charges due to the respondent Board. 3.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned Counsel for the petitioner is permitted to file a fresh application to the respondent electricity board, for electricity service connection. If any such application is filed by the petitioner, the respondent electricity board is directed to consider the same as per existing scheme as expeditiously as possible. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CO) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar jas To 1.The Chairman, Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, Anna Salai, Chennai.

2.The Executive Engineer, (OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE) Chengai Electricity Distribution Division, Sriperumbuthur - 602 105.

+1cc to Mr.C.Ravichandran, Advocate sr.59034 W.P.No.3968 of 2010 and W.M.P.No.1 of 2010 mp(co) nr 30/09/2019 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/