← Library
Madras High CourtWP/7390/2010dismissed

K.Rangasamy, v. The Executive Engineer,

2018-07-23Honourable Mr Justice R. Mahadevan2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 23.07.2018

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.MAHADEVAN W.P.No.7390 of 2010 K.Rangaswamy ... Petitioner Vs.

1. The Executive Engineer, Coimbatore Electrical Distribution Taluk (North), Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, Mettupalayam 641 301, Coimbatore District.

2. The Assistant Executive Engineer, Coimbatore Electrical Distribution Taluk (North) Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, Karamadai 641 104, Coimbatore District.

3. The Assistant Electrical Engineer, Coimbatore Electrical Supply Taluk (North), Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, Thooyanur (South) 641 113, Coimbatore District.

4. R.Rajan

5. Senthil Kumar (R5 impleaded as per order dated 05.08.2010 in MP.No.1/2010 in WP.No.7390 of 2010) ... Respondents Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents 1 to 3 herein to give electricity supply by passing necessary orders on petitioner's application dated 05.01.2001 registered in Registration No.156/2000-2001 at the earliest. For Petitioner : No appearance For R1 to R3 : Mr.S.K.Rameshwar For R4 & R5 : Mr.Ma.Pa.Thangavel

O R D E R

The prayer made in this writ petition is to issue a mandamus, directing the respondents 1 to 3 to give electricity supply by considering the petitioner's application dated https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

05.01.2001 registered as No.156/2000-2001 at the earliest. 2.On 16.07.2018, when the matter was taken up for consideration, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that they are no longer appearing for the petitioner, as they had already handed over the entire case bundle to the petitioner through his lower court counsel. The learned counsel has also filed a memo dated 16.07.2018 to that effect. In view of the same, this Court directed the Registry to remove the name of the counsel and print the name of the petitioner in the cause list and post the writ petition next week.

3.Today, when the matter is taken up for hearing, there is no representation for the petitioner, despite his name having been printed in the cause list.

4.On the other hand, the learned counsel for the respective respondents, on instructions, submitted that the relief sought for herein has become infructuous and hence, nothing survives for adjudication in this writ petition.

5.In view of the above, this writ petition stands dismissed. No costs.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS VI) //True copy// Sub Assistant Registrar rk/av To

1. The Executive Engineer, Coimbatore Electrical Distribution Taluk (North), Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, Mettupalayam 641 301, Coimbatore District.

2. The Assistant Executive Engineer, Coimbatore Electrical Distribution Taluk (North) Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, Karamadai 641 104, Coimbatore District.

3. The Assistant Electrical Engineer, Coimbatore Electrical Supply Taluk (North), Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, Thooyanur (South) 641 113, Coimbatore District.

W.P.No.7390 of 2010 MG(CO) GN(30/08/2018) https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/