Pachaiammal, v. The Chairman,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 22.02.2021

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.SARAVANAN W.P.NO.26881 OF 2016 Pachaiammal ... Petitioner Vs

1. The Chairman, Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, Anna Salai, Chennai - 600 002.

2. The Superintending Engineer, Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, Krishnagiri Circle, Krishnagiri.

3. The Executive Engineer, Operation and Maintenance Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, Krishnagiri.

...Respondents

Prayer:

Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a writ of Mandamus to direct the respondents to provide electricity connection to the petitioner's pumpset for irrigation of her agricultural land based on the 3rd respondent's Na.Ka.SR.Po/Epa/Ki.Kri/Va/Vu/10, self financing Sr.No.F3/29/99 dated 8.1.99.

For Petitioner : Mr.M.Selvam For Respondents : Mr.Varun Kumar Standing Counsel

ORDER

The petitioner has filed the writ petition to direct the respondent to provide electricity connection to the petitioner's pumpset for irrigatiion of her agricultural land based on the 3rd respondent's letter dated 08.01.1999 bearing reference No.Na.Ka.SR.Po/Epa/Ki.Kri/Va/Vu/10.

2. It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner is

an agriculturist holding small piece of land and applied for electricity connection under Revised Self Finance Scheme, for which, he paid initial deposit amount of Rs.500/- under Rs.25,000/- VID receipt No.406386 dated 25.01.1995. He further submits that the petitioner will pay the aforesaid amount within a period of four weeks from the date of the order.

3. According to the respondent, though the petitioner paid initial amount of Rs.500/- but failed to pay the balance amount of Rs.24,500/- under the Revised Self Finance Scheme (RSFS) dated 25.01.1995 since the petitioner failed to pay the balance amount of Rs.24,500/-, a demand notice was also issued on 22.02.1999. 90 days time was given in the aforesaid letter to the petitioner. However, the petitioner did not come forward to pay the amount nor applied for extension of time. Since the petitioner did not come forward to produce any of the land documents and/or no objection from co-owners specified, the respondents were unable to proceed with the application filed by the petitioner.

4. Considered the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner and the respondent. I am of the view that the writ petition has been filed belatedly almost after a lapse of 21 years since the cause of action arose in the year 1999. Since the petitioner is an agriculturist holding small piece of land and applied for electricity connection under Revised Self Finance Scheme, I direct the petitioner to approach the respondent as per the schemes that are available currently. In case, a new scheme is available, the petitioner's application may be considered on priority basis and electricity connection may be given to the petitioner subject to the petitioner satisfying the other requirements of the scheme. In case old scheme is still in vogue, the petitioner's application may be taken up on priority basis and considered subject to the petitioner satisfying the other requirement.

5. The petitioner is therefore directed to approach the respondent namely, the 3rd respondent within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of. No costs. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS VII) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar drl

To

1. The Chairman, Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, Anna Salai, Chennai - 600 002.

2. The Superintending Engineer, Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, Krishnagiri Circle, Krishnagiri.

3. The Executive Engineer, Operation and Maintenance Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, Krishnagiri.

+1cc to Mr.M.Selvam, Advocate, S.R.No.10782 W.P.No.26881 of 2016 SKY(CO) CS/16/03/2021