Thirupathi v. The Superintending Engineer

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 16.04.2026

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR Thirupathi ... Petitioner vs.

1.The Superintending Engineer, Tamil Nadu Generation of Electricity and Distribution Corporation, (TANGEDCO), Dindigul Electricity Distribution Circle, Dindigul.

2.The Assistant Engineer, Tamil Nadu Generation of Electricity and Distribution Corporation, (TANGEDCO), Vadamadurai, Vedasendur Taluk, Dindigul District.

3.The Junior Engineer, Tamil Nadu Generation of Electricity and Distribution Corporation, (TANGEDCO), Vadamadurai, Vedasendur Taluk, Dindigul District.

4.Errmanaickar ... Respondents 1/6

PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records pertaining to the impugned communication issued by the 3rd respondent by his proceedings in A.No.E.Mee.Po/Ke/Va/Dept/Va.Aa/Ko. Complaint petition/Aa.No.198/25 dated 13.01.2025 and quash the same as illegal and consequently, to direct the 3rd respondent to provide electricity connection (111A1 Agri) to petitioner's agriculture land in S.Nos.267/8 and 267/7 situated at Kannimar Palayam, Kollapatti Village, Vadamadurai, Vedasendur Taluk, Dindigul District. For Petitioner :Mr.S.Sarvagan Prabhu For R1 to R3 :Mr.S.Deenadhayalan For R4 :Mr.L.Jeen Felix *****

O R D E R

The petitioner challenges the communication dated 13.01.2025 issued by the third respondent, whereby the application submitted by the petitioner for providing electricity service connection to his agricultural land comprised in Survey Nos. 267/8 and 267/7, situated at Kannimar Palayam, Kollapatti Village, Vadamadurai, Vedasandur Taluk, Dindigul District, came to be rejected on the ground that the fourth respondent had objected to drawing the electricity line from the electric poles erected in his land.

2/6

2. Heard Mr. S. Sarvagan Prabhu, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. S. Deenadhayalan, learned counsel appearing for respondents 1 to 3, and Mr. L. Jeen Felix, learned counsel appearing for the fourth respondent.

3. The petitioner is the owner of the subject agricultural land situated adjacent to the agricultural land belonging to the fourth respondent. The fourth respondent has already been provided with electricity service connection under the agricultural category, and an electric pole has been erected in his land. The official respondents proposed to draw electricity lines from the said poles erected in the land of the fourth respondent for the purpose of providing electricity service connection to the petitioner's agricultural land. However, the fourth respondent raised objections to the same.

4. Regulation 29(6) of the Tamil Nadu Electricity Distribution Code provides that every consumer shall permit the licensee to install all requisite equipment such as transformers, switchgears, meters, etc., and 3/6

to lay necessary cables or overhead lines and provide connections thereto on the consumer's premises. The consumer shall also permit the licensee to extend supply to other consumers through the cables, lines, and equipment installed in the consumer's premises, provided that, in the opinion of the Engineer, such extension does not unduly affect the supply to the existing consumer.

5. The aforesaid Regulation clearly empowers the respondents/TANGEDCO to extend electricity supply to the petitioner's agricultural land through the cables, lines, and equipment installed in the fourth respondent's agricultural land. Therefore, the objection raised by the fourth respondent is not tenable, and the respondents/TANGEDCO are under a statutory obligation to provide electricity service connection to the petitioner's land under the agricultural category.

6. In view of the above, the impugned communication dated 13.01.2025 issued by the third respondent is quashed. The third respondent is directed to provide electricity service connection to the petitioner's agricultural land under the agricultural category by drawing 4/6

electricity lines from the poles erected in the fourth respondent's land, without causing undue inconvenience to the fourth respondent, subject to the petitioner paying the necessary charges, if not already paid.

7. The aforesaid exercise shall be completed within a period of four (4) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

8. There shall be no order as to costs.

Index :Yes / No 16.04.2026 Internet :Yes / No NCC :Yes / No cmr 5/6

HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR, J.

cmr 16.04.2026 6/6