Madras High CourtWP/17283/2008dismissed as infructuous

Mrs.Najmunisha v. The Tamilnadu Electricity

2017-04-11Honourable Mr Justice M.Thanikachalam (Lok-Ii)3 pages

HIGH COURT LEGAL SERVICES COMMITTEE, CHENNAI Lok Adalat-II organised by the High Court Legal Services Committee Tuesday, the 11th day of APRIL 2017 LOK ADALAT AWARD (Chapter VI and u/s 21 of Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987) Presided by The Hon'ble Mr.JUSTICE M. THANIKACHALAM (Retd.) and Members Mr.M.Sambasivam Mr.M.Dhamodharan W.P.No.17283 of 2008 ( Petition filed to issue Writ of Mandamus or any other writ, order or direction in the nature of Writ of Mandamus calling for the records in Ka.No.JE/OM/UMII/Gudi/Divn./No.06/0708/ dt.14.2.2008 passed by the 2nd respondents to provide electricity service connection to the petitioner's residential portion at No.8, Bada Sahib Street, Thalayattam, Gudiattam, Vellore District.) Mrs. Najmunusha .. Petitioner Vs.

1. The Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, rep. By Executive Engineer, Gudiyattam Urban II Gudiyattam, Vellore District.

2. The Junior Engineer, Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, Gudiyattam Urban II Gudiyattam, N.A.A.District.

3. Executive Officer, Tamil Nadu Wakf Board, Vellore, Vellore District.

.. Respondents

This case came up for settlement before Lok Adalat. Both the parties are present. Mrs. Najmunisha / petitioner, and Mr.D.Ravichandran, Junior Engineer TNEB / 2nd respondent is present. The respondent for S.Abdulllah work Inspector for Tamil Nadu Wakf Board also present. After mutual discussion, negotiation, mediation and conciliation between both parties, they arrived at a compromise to settle the matter as follows: The petitioner who is residing in the premises of 3rd respondent as tenant, has filed a petition before the respondents 1 and 2 seeking service connection. Unfortunately the petitioner's claim was not properly considered and said petition was negatived on 14.2.2008. Aggrieved by the said order this writ petition is filed seeking a direction against the respondents and, to setaside the above said order and give direction for service connection.

2. Today the petitioner, the Junior Engineer of Electricity Board representing respondents 1 and 2 and Walk Board inspector are all present. Though both the parties are not represented by counsel considering facts which I am going to give in detail their presence may not be so essential, and in the absence of the representive counsels also, effective order could be passed without causing prejudice, to the parties.

3. The petitioner and the respondents have made joint endorsement in the petition, which reads that on 16.2.2009 service connection No.08-462-115-2071 was given to the petitioner as requested and persuant to the connection also E.B. Card was issued, shown before me. Further it is also an admitted fact that the petitioner is consuming Electricity from the said service connection on and from 16.2.2009. Therefore, in the above said circumstances from the date of filing of petition as well as on this date, the prayer in the petition is fully satisfied and therefore keeping the writ petition is unnecessary and in this view it become infracutuous. As requested by the parties in the joint endorsement, in the absence of the counsel also, the petition could be disposed off.

4. In view of the above endorsement settlement reached. The writ petition is dismissed as infractutuous, the further fact being, the prayer was already complied with. The writ petition disposed off accordingly.

-s/dMrs. Najmunusha Counsel for the Petitioner

-s/d1. The Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, rep. By Executive Engineer, Gudiyattam Urban II Gudiyattam, Vellore District.

Counsel for the 1st Respondent -s/d2. The Junior Engineer, Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, Gudiyattam Urban II Gudiyattam, N.A.A.District.

Counsel for the 2nd Respondent -s/d3. Executive Officer, Tamil Nadu Wakf Board, Vellore, Vellore District. Counsel for the 3rd Respondent -s/dJudge -s/d- -s/d- Member Member To:The parties/Advocate concerned Copy to:

1.The Secretary, High Court Legal Services Committee, Chennai.

2. The Section Officer, V.R.Section, High Court, Madras. 3.The Section Officer, Lok Adalat Section, High Court, Madras.+2 copies W.P.No.17283 of 2008 rv(co) aa09/05/2017