G.Geetha, W/O.Gurumoorthy, v. The Executive Engineer,

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 11.11.2024

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE L.VICTORIA GOWRI W.P.(MD)No.7952 of 2019 G.Geetha ... Petitioner Vs 1.The Executive Engineer, O/o.Executive Engineer, Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, Ponnagaram, Chatrapatti Road, Rajapalayam Taluk, Virudhuangar District.

2.The Assistant Engineer, O/o.Assistant Engineer, Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, Chatrapatti Road, Rajapalayam Taluk, Virudhuangar District.

3.P.Aavudai Thangam @ Thangam 4.P.Rajasekar

...Respondents

PRAYER: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a writ of Mandamus, directing the Respondents No.1 and 2 to cancel the electricity connection granted in favour of the Respondent No.4 in service number 0725007501 in survey number 104/7 situated at Varagunaramapuram in Rajapalyam Taluk, Virudhunagar District. For Petitioner : Mr.T.Thirumurugan For Respondents : Mr.S.Deenadhayalan Standing Counsel for R1 & R2 1/5

ORDER

The prayer of the writ petition is as follows: This writ petition has been filed for issuance of Writ of Mandamus directing the Respondents No.1 and 2 to cancel the electricity connection granted in favour of the Respondent No.4 in service number 0725007501 in survey number 104/7 situated at Varagunaramapuram in Rajapalyam Taluk, Virudhunagar District.

2. It is brought to the notice of the Court that already the similar writ petition has been filed in W.P(MD)No.4544 of 2017 seeking to direct the Principal Secretary, Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board, the District Environment Engineer, Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board, Virudhunagar District and the District Collector, Virudhunagar to take action against the fourth respondent for constructing the tyre factory in her adjacent land. The said writ petition came to be disposed of by this Court on 14.02.2019, directing the respondents therein to look into allegation which was made by the petitioner and pass appropriate orders within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 2/5

3.The learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that even after the order of this Court, nothing transpired favourably from preventing the fourth respondent from running the tyre factory in the land in question. Hence, it can be understood that after a lapse of eight weeks from the date of the order passed by this Court on 14.02.2019, this writ petition came to be filed.

4.Heard Mr.T.Thirumurugan, the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr.S.Deenadhayalan, the learned Standing Counsel appearing for R1 and R2. Carefully perused the materials available on record.

5.This writ petition has been filed seeking the respondents Nos.1 and 2 to cancel the electricity connection granted in favour of the fourth respondent to stall his business. This Court is not inclined to pass any favourable orders to the petitioner facilitating his personal vendetta. 6.With the above said observations, this writ petition stands dismissed. No costs.

11.11.2024 NCC : Yes/No Index : Yes/No Internet: Yes/No 3/5

RJR 4/5

L.VICTORIA GOWRI , J.

RJR W.P.(MD)No.7952 of 2019 11.11.2024 5/5