Mohamed Farook v. The Executive Engineer (Electrical)

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 10.03.2026

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.SATHISH KUMAR AND THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.JOTHIRAMAN and C.M.P.(MD) No.2972 of 2026 Mohamed Farook ... Petitioner Vs

1. The Executive Engineer (Electrical), South Urban, Madurai.

2. The Assistant Executive Engineer (Electrical), Distribution, Subramaniyapuram, South Urban, Madurai.

3. The Assistant Engineer (Electrical), Subramaniyapuram, Power Station Road, Electricity Distribution Division, Madurai District - 625001.

4. Inspector of Police, South Gate Police Station, Madurai District.

5. Abdul Jabbar 1/6

6. The Commissioner of Madurai Corporation, Madurai Corporation, Madurai.

... Respondents PRAYER: Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent, against the order dated 24.02.2026 in W.P.(MD) No.2265 of 2026. For Appellant : Mr.SMA. Jinnah For R1 to R3 : Mr.K.Sanjay Gandhi Government Advocate (Crl.Side) For R4 : Mr.S.Deenadhayalan Standing Counsel

ORDER

(Order of the Court was made by N.SATHISH KUMAR, J.) The writ appeal has been filed as against the order of the learned Single Judge dismissing the writ petition. The said writ petition has been filed challenging the communication dated 12.01.2026 issued by the third respondent seeking production of certain documents from the appellant herein to prove his possession as a tenant and also not to disconnect the electricity connection.

2. It is the contention raised by the writ petitioner that the 2/6

petitioner is in possession of the subject property and he is a tenant on the premises. However, the fifth respondent had obtained a demolition order from the Corporation and demolished the building. Taking advantage of the demolition, disconnection of electricity has also been happened. However, the Writ Court has not properly considered the order. The petitioner claims that he has individual rights on the basis of the HIBA and he has already filed a suit in O.S.No.45 of 2026 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Madurai, for permanent injunction based on the possession of property.

3. Whereas the fifth respondent in the writ petition would contend that the fifth respondent is the owner of the property and the appellant is none other than his own sister's son. The appellant was helping him for few years. Taking advantage of the same, now he is trying to grab the property. According to the fifth respondent, he has already obtained demolition order and also the building has also been demolished and disconnection of electricity has also been effected by the Authorities. In such view of the matter, at this stage nothing survives in the appeal. 3/6

4. Heard both sides and perused the entire material.

5. It is not disputed that only after demolition, it appears that the electricity connection has also been disconnected. In such view of the matter, as the petitioner has already filed a civil suit to prove his possession, he has to establish his possession first. In any event, if he is able to establish that he was in possession of the property in his own independent right, then he can seek electricity connection. Therefore, at this stage, we are not in a position to interfere with the Writ Court order.

6. With these observations, this Writ Appeal stands dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. NCS : Yes/No [N.S.K., J.] & [M.J.R., J.] Index : Yes / No 10.03.2026 Internet : Yes / No apd 4/6

To

1. The Executive Engineer (Electrical), South Urban, Madurai.

2. The Assistant Executive Engineer (Electrical), Distribution, Subramaniyapuram, South Urban, Madurai.

3. The Assistant Engineer (Electrical), Subramaniyapuram, Power Station Road, Electricity Distribution Division, Madurai District - 625001.

4. Inspector of Police, South Gate Police Station, Madurai District.

5/6

N.SATHISH KUMAR, J.

AND M.JOTHIRAMAN, J.

apd ORDER MADE IN 10.03.2026 6/6