← Library
Madras High CourtWP/5283/2017dismissed

A. Muruganantham v. The Chairman

2022-01-21Honourable Mr Justice Krishnan Ramasamy3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 21.01.2022 C O R A M THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KRISHNAN RAMASAMY W.P.No.5283 of 2017 and W.M.P.No.5599 of 2017 A.Muruganantham

...Petitioner

Vs 1.The Chairman, Annasalai, Chennai - 600 002.

2.The Superintending Engineer, Kallakurichi, Villupuram District.

3.The Assistant Engineer, O & M (Orhanization and Maintenance), G.Ariyur, Thirukovillur Taluk, Villupuram District.

4.J.Arokiya Marry 5.S.Dhairiyam ... Respondents (R5 is impleaded as per order dated 16.03.2017 by MMSJ in W.M.P.No.7045 of 2017 in W.P.No.5283 of 2017) Prayer Writ Petition filed under Section 226 of the Constitution of India, prayed for the issuance of Writ of Mandamus, directing the third respondent not to give electricity connection to the fourth respondent bearing Well comprised in Survey No.112/2A, Memalur Village, Thirukovillur Taluk, Villupuram District. For Petitioner : Mr.G.Ranganathan For R1 to R3 : Mr.L.Jai Venkatesh Standing Counsel For R4 & R5 : Mr.N.Suresh

ORDER

This Writ Petitioner has been filed seeking for the issuance of Writ of Mandamus, directing the third respondent not to give electricity connection to the fourth respondent bearing Well comprised in Survey No.112/2A, Memalur Village, Thirukovillur Taluk, Villupuram District.

2.The present Writ Petition has been filed on the apprehension that the third respondent made an attempt to provide the electricity service connection based on the request of the fourth respondent. However, when the matter is taken up for hearing, the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents 1 to 3 submits that the respondents 1 and 3 have never received any application from the fourth respondent seeking electricity connection, therefore, the question of providing electricity connection to the fourth respondent does not arise. In such circumstances, the present Writ Petition has been filed for a direction to the respondents 1 to 3, not to provide the electricity connection for the fourth respondent. 3.

As contended by the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents 1 to 3, in the event no application was received by the official respondents, the question of providing electricity does not arise. The apprehension of the petitioner that the third respondent intent to provide the electricity connection to the fourth respondent does not have any merits. Therefore, this Court does not find any merits in the present Writ Petition.

4.In the result, this Writ Petition is dismissed. No Costs. Connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CO) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar rst To:

1. The Chairman, Annasalai, Chennai - 600 002.

2. The Superintending Engineer, Kallakurichi, Villupuram District.

3. The Assistant Engineer, O & M (Orhanization and Maintenance), G.Ariyur, Thirukovillur Taluk, Villupuram District.

+1cc to Mr.G.Ranganathan, Advocate, S.R.No.3598 +1cc to Mr.N.Suresh, Advocate, S.R.No.3574 W.P.No.5283 of 2017 and W.M.P.No.5599 of 2017 GPL(CO) CT 15/02/2022