Madras High CourtWP/14986/2026disposed of with direction

S. Priyanka v. The Chief Engineer,

2026-04-21Honourable Mr Justice M.Dhandapani4 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 21.04.2026

CORAM:

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M. DHANDAPANI S. Priyanka ..Petitioner(s) Vs

1. The Chief Engineer, Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation (TANGEDCO), No.144, Anna Salai, Chennai 600 002.

2. The Superintending Engineer, TANGEDCO, Administrative Branch, Mayiladuthurai Electricity Distribution Circle, Mayiladuthurai District.

3. The Executive Engineer, Operation and Maintenance, TANGEDCO, Administrative Branch, Mayiladuthurai District 609 001.

4. The Assistant Engineer, Operation and Maintenance, TANGEDCO, Administrative Branch, Mayiladuthurai District.

5. The Assistant Executive Engineer, Operation and Maintenance, TANGEDCO, Administrative Branch, Mayiladuthurai District.

..Respondents 1/4

Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to shift the hightension electric line passing over the petitioner's property comprised in T.S. No.712/9A, situated at Mayiladuthurai District, in accordance with the petitioner's representation dated 19.11.2025, within a time frame as may be fixed by this Court.

For Petitioner :

Mr.U. Kathiravan For Respondents :

Mr.D.B.R. Prabhu

ORDER

This writ petition has been filed seeking for a direction to the respondents to shift the High-Tension electric line passing over the petitioner's property comprised in T.S. No.712/9A, situated at Mayiladuthurai District, by considering the petitioner's representation dated 19.11.2025.

2. The case of the petitioner is that she is the absolute owner of the property situated in T.S. No.712/9A, Mayiladuthurai District, and intends to construct a residential house. However, a High-Tension electric line is passing directly over the said property, thereby preventing any construction. Though the petitioner submitted an online application on 22.05.2024 and paid the requisite charges, no effective action has been taken for shifting of High-Tension electric line. It is further stated that the 4th respondent issued a reply stating that objections have been raised by the neighbouring landowners. 2/4

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submit that the obligation to decide the alignment and shifting of the electric line lies with the statutory authorities and therefore, it would suffice, if a direction is issued by this Court to the respondents to consider the petitioner's representation dated 19.11.2025.

4. Learned counsel for the respondents fairly submitted that based on the objections received from neighbouring landowners of the petitioner, the same was not processed. However, he submitted that the 4th respondent will consider the petitioner's representation in accordance with law.

5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court directs the 4th respondent to consider the petitioner's application dated 22.05.2024 and representation dated 19.11.2025 for shifting the High-Tension electric line, passes through petitioner's property, and pass appropriate orders on merits and in accordance with law, after affording opportunity to all necessary parties, within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

6. The writ petition stands disposed of. No costs. 21.04.2026 Index : Yes / No Speaking Order / Non-speaking order vsi2 3/4

M. DHANDAPANI, J.

vsi2 To