Madras High CourtWP/13937/2021disposed of

R.Rukmani v. The Chairman

2021-07-07Honourable Mr Justice D. Krishnakumar3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 07.07.2021

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D.KRISHNAKUMAR W.P.NO. 13937 OF 2021 AND W.M.P.NO. 14806 OF 2021

1. R.Rukmani

2. Rama Priya

3. Srividya, ..Petitioners Vs

1. The Chairman, TANGEDCO, No.800, Anna Salai, Chennai-600002.

2. The Assistant Executive Engineer, TANGEDCO, Easwaran Kovil Street, Near Bus Stand, Madipakkam, Chennai-600091.

3. W.Charles Kamalesan, S/o Late Watson Daniel, No.175, Gandhi Road, Velachery, Chennai-600042.

..Respondents Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India for writ of mandamus, directing the 1st and 2nd Respondents herein to disconnect and withdraw the EB Service connection given by them in the name of the 3rd Respondent to Plot No.1023, 8th Main Road, Ram Nagar, Madipakkam, Chennai600091 by way of considering the representation dated 30.11.2020 made by the petitioner to them.

For Petitioner : Mr.R.Umasuthan For Respondent No.1 & 2 : Mr.P.Gunaraj, TNEB

O R D E R

Challenging the electricity service connection effected to the 3rd respondent in Plot No.1023, 8th Main Road, Ram Nagar, Madipakkam, Chennai 600091, the petitioners have preferred the present writ petition.

2. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and the learned standing counsel appearing for the respondents and perused the records.

3. According to the learned counsel for the petitioners, the 3rd respondent on the strength of the forged patta and settlement deed obtained in respect of the petitioner's property, has obtained electricity service connection from the 2nd respondent. The 1st petitioner has preferred a criminal complaint against the 3rd respondent and based on the said complaint an FIR has been registered in Crime No.67/2021 under Sections 465,467,468,471 and 34 of IPC. Subsequently, the 3rd respondent has moved anticipatory bail and the same was dismissed by this Court.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioners further submitted that the petitioners have made representation to the 1st & 2nd respondents to disconnect the service connection issued to the 3rd respondent. The learned counsel for the petitioners further submitted that the 3rd respondent is not in possession of the aforesaid premises, therefore it would suffice to issue directions to the 1st & 2nd respondents to consider their representation and pass orders.

5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and in view of the aforesaid submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners, this Court, at this stage, cannot go into the controversies between the parties. Since the learned counsel for the petitioners represented before this Court that it would suffice to issue directions to the 2nd respondent to consider the objections of the petitioner in respect of the electricity service connection effected in favour of the 3rd respondent, this Court directs the 2nd respondent to consider the petitioners' representation dated 30.11.2020 and pass appropriate orders on merits, in accordance with law, after providing opportunities to the 3rd respondent and other aggrieved persons, within a period of twelve weeks from the date of

receipt of a copy of this order.

6. With the above directions, the writ petition stands disposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS-VIII) // True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar ak To

1. The Chairman, TANGEDCO, No.800, Anna Salai, Chennai-600002.

2. The Assistant Executive Engineer, TANGEDCO, Easwaran Kovil Street, Near Bus Stand, Madipakkam, Chennai-600091.

+1cc to Mr.R.Umasuthan, Advocate, SR.No.31674 +1cc to Mr.P.Gunaraj, Advocate, SR.No.31794 W.P.No. 13937 of 2021 and W.M.P.No. 14806 of 2021 PCH(CO) RLP(02/08/2021)