Madras High CourtWP/37206/2025disposed of with direction

D.Mani v. The District Collector

2025-10-06Honourable Mr Justice M.Dhandapani6 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 06.10.2025

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI D.Mani .

...Petitioner

1. The District Collector The District Collector Office Krishnagiri District.

2.The Joint Engineer The Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation Limited O/o. The Assistant Engineer Pochampalli, Krishnagiri District 3.The Assistant Engineer The Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation Limited O/o. The Joint Engineer Pochampalli, Krishnagiri District 4.P.Kannan .....

Respondents PRAYER: This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records relating to the impugned order made in f/vz;/cbgh-,g-ngh/g-t.M-nfh.jdp-vz;/82-2025 dated 20.08.2025 passed by the 3rd respondent and quash the same and consequently, direct the respondents to forthwith restore the electricity connection to the

petitioner's premises in compliance with this Court's order in W.P No.26641 of 2025 dated 29.07.2025, within a time frame to be fixed by this Court. For Petitioner : Mr.K.Prabhu For R1 : Mr.M.Rajendran Additional Government Pleader For R2 & R3 : Mr.S.Madhusundanan Standing Counsel

O R D E R

This writ petition has been filed, challenging the impugned order passed by the 3rd respondent dated 20.08.2025 and seeking a direction to the respondents to forthwith restore the electricity connection to the petitioner's premises in compliance with this Court's order in W.P No.26641 of 2025 dated 29.07.2025, within a time frame to be fixed by this Court.

2. The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner is the owner of an agricultural land comprised in Survey No.467/1, Banthirahalli Village, Jingalkattirampatti Post, Pochampalli Taluk, Krishnagiri District. He had obtained an agricultural electricity service connection for irrigation purposes which is the sole source of livelihood for him and his family. Due to objections raised by neighbouring landowners, the electricity connection was disconnected,

causing serious hardship to the petitioner. The adjacent landowner/4th respondent filed W.P No.28644 of 2022 before this Court seeking to prevent the erection of new electric poles across his land and the same was disposed of on 08.012.2025. In the meantime, the petitioner filed a writ petition before this Court in W.P No.26641 of 2025 seeking restoration of electricity connection and this Court, by an order dated 29.07.2025 issued a direction to the 3rd respondent to effectively prosecute the application filed before the 1st respondent seeking "enter upon permission" and also to consider the petitioner's representation dated 30.05.2025 and pass orders within a period of four weeks. However, since the adjacent land owners objected for effecting the service connection, the 3rd respondent passed an order dated 20.08.

2025, directing the petitioner to provide an "objection-free" pathway for effecting the service connection. The petitioner made an application and paid a sum of Rs.2,75,000/- through Takkal. Even then, the 3rd respondent refused to effect the service connection. It is for the 3rd respondent/Electricity Board to obtain an enter upon permission from the District Collector and without doing so, passing such impugned order is not certainable. Hence, he prayed for appropriate orders.

3. Per contra the learned counsel for the 2nd an 3rd respondents would submit that the 2nd and 3rd respondents have already made an application to the District Collector seeking for enter upon permission and the same is pending.

However, this Court may set aside the impugned order and issue a direction to the 1st respondent/District Collector to grant enter upon permission, after providing an opportunity to the 4th respondent and pass appropriate orders.

4. Since no adverse order was passed against the 4th respondent, notice to the 4th respondent is dispensed with.

5. Heard the learned counsel on either side and perused the materials available on record.

6.Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the petitioner has made an application for effecting the service connection and it was ordered by the 2nd and 3rd respondents by receiving Rs.2,75,000/- from the petitioner. However, since the 4th respondent and other land owners objected for effecting the service connection, the said impugned order was passed by the 3rd respondent. The 2nd and 3rd respondents even after knowing very well that there was an objection made by the adjacent land owners, had received the entire amount. It is for the 2nd respondent to make an application before the 1st respondent/District Collector for obtaining the enter upon permission as per the Indian Telegraph Act. In the present case, the 2nd and 3rd respondents have

already made an application to the 1st respondent/District Collector under the Indian Telegraph Act to obtain enter upon permission.

7. In view of the above, this Court is inclined to set aside the impugned order of the 3rd respondent dated 20.08.2025 and issue a direction to the 1st respondent/District Collector to consider the application made by the 2nd and 3rd respondents for obtaining enter upon permission, after providing an opportunity of personal hearing to the 4th respondent and pass appropriate orders within a period of six (6) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

8. With the above direction, this writ petition is disposed of. No costs. 06.10.2025 Index : Yes/No : Yes/No Speaking/non-speaking order uma M.DHANDAPANI, J.

uma To

1. The District Collector

The District Collector Office Krishnagiri District.