A.Amudha v. The Tneb, Rep. By Its
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 15.11.2016
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SURESH KUMAR W.P. No.4161 of 2007 and MP No.1 of 2007 A.Amudha ... Petitioner Vs.
1 The TamilNadu Electricity Board, Rep. by its Superintending Engineer, (Operation & Maintenance) Kattankolathur-Maraimalai Nagar, Chengalpattu Taluk, Kancheepuram District Pin Code 603 209.
2 The Assistant Executive Engineer, (Operation & Maintenance) TamilNadu Electricity Board, Kattankolathur-Maraimalai Nagar, Chengalpattu Taluk, Kancheepuram District Pin Code 603 209.
*3 L.Thiruvengadam .. Respondents * R3 impleaded as per order dated 24.04.2007 by in MP No.2/07 in WP No.4161/07 PRAYER : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records of the first respondent in f/vz;/c/br/bgh//,g/k/k/efh/nrhfl;L/mvz;/293/ehs; 23.12.06 and quash the same, consequently direct the second respondent to restore the Electricity connection No.949 at premises No.1 Parasakthi Street, Potheri West, Kattankulathur, Kancheepuram District.
For Petitioner : Mr.S.Palaniappan For Respondents: Mr.S.K.Rameshwar, Standing Counsel (TNEB)
O R D E R
The prayer in the Writ Petition is for a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records of the first respondent in f/vz;/c/br/bgh//,g/k/k/efh/nrhfl;L/mvz;/293/ehs; 23.12.06 and quash the same, consequently direct the second respondent to restore the Electricity connection No.949 at premises No.1 Parasakthi Street, Potheri West, Kattankulathur, Kancheepuram District.
2.The grievance of the petitioner is that since his request to the respondent for restoration of electricity connection was not done, he has approached this Court challenging the impugned order by which the second respondent has rejected the request of the petitioner for restoring the electricity connection. 3.Even though the petitioner has challenged the said order of the second respondent by which the service connection request by the petitioner was rejected, the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent/Board would contend that during the pendency of the Writ Petition, in obedience of the order passed by this Court dated 12.06.2007, the service connection was restored on 07.09.2007 after collecting the necessary electricity charges. The relevant portion of counter affidavit filed by the respondents is reproduce here under.
6.The said order dated 23.12.2006 was again challenged by the petitioner in the present Writ Petition. The 3rd respondent was impleaded as per order dated 24.04.2007 in MP No.2/2007. In obedience to the order passed by the Hon'ble Court dated 12.6.2007 the service connection was restored on 9.7.2007 after collecting necessary reconnection charges.
7.I further submit that the service connection was restored to the petitioner after inspection. During the inspection it was found that the petitioner is in actual enjoyment of the premises under dispute. The copy of the Revenue records produced by the 3rd respondent shows the title of the 3rd respondent over the disputed property.
4. In view of the said averments made in the counter affidavit by the respondents which is taken on record, no further issue is pending in this Writ Petition for adjudication. Hence the Writ Petition is disposed by recording
the said statement of the respondents. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
Sd/- Asst.Registrar (CS II ) /true copy/ Sub Asst. Registrar jv To 1 The Superintending Engineer, TamilNadu Electricity Board, (Operation & Maintenance) Kattankolathur-Maraimalai Nagar, Chengalpattu Taluk, Kancheepuram District Pin Code 603 209.
2 The Assistant Executive Engineer, (Operation & Maintenance) TamilNadu Electricity Board, Kattankolathur-Maraimalai Nagar, Chengalpattu Taluk, Kancheepuram District Pin Code 603 209.
W.P. No.4161 of 2007 LRS (CO) kk 29/12