Muthu R v. The Superintending Engineer
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 20.06.2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.SARAVANAN and W.M.P.(MD).Nos.12630 & 12632 of 2025 R.Muthu .. Petitioner Vs.
1.The Superintending Engineer (Electrical), TANGEDCO, Door No.110/11KV, S.S. Complex, Samayanallur, Madurai - 625 402.
2.The Assistant Engineer, TANGEDCO, Sholavandan, Vadipatti Taluk, Madurai - 625 214.
3.V.Pitchaiammal 4.M.Balajothi Kannan .. Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records on the file of the 2nd respondent pertaining to the name transfer application of the 4th respondent in Application No.158/2231134 dated 27.12.2023 for Service Connection No.05-158-010-321 Sholavanthan SS, Vadipatti Taluk, Madurai District based
on which the impugned name transfer proceedings was passed by the 2nd respondent and to set aside the same and consequently revert back the service connection in the name of the petitioner.
For Petitioner : Mr.S.Chandrasekaran For R-1 & R-2 : Mr.S.Deenadhayalan Standing Counsel
ORDER
The petitioner claims to be the owner of the property in Survey No.292/42 pursuant to a partition deed dated 19.04.1993. It is the case of the petitioner that the fourth respondent has illegally mutated the revenue records and has obtained patta in respect of the property, which fell in the hands of the petitioner pursuant to the aforesaid partition deed dated 19.04.1993.
2. It is the further case of the petitioner that he has taken appropriate steps for cancellation of patta before the revenue authorities. However, the fourth respondent has managed to get the power connection altered in his name before it is otherwise standing in the name of the petitioner without notice to the petitioner. Aggrieved by the same, the present Writ Petition has been filed.
3. The grievance of the petitioner is legitimate and there appears to be an order transferring the EB connection to the name of the fourth respondent. Under these circumstances, there shall be a direction to the second respondent to issue appropriate notice to the private respondents as to why the name change effected in the EB connection in favour of the fourth respondent should not be cancelled and restored back in the name of the petitioner. The second respondent shall issue appropriate notice to the private respondents and also to the petitioner and thereafter, proceed to pass a final order on merits and in accordance with law. This exercise is expected to be completed within a period of twelve (12) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. It is needless to state that the principles of natural justice shall be complied with before final orders are passed.
4. Accordingly, the Writ Petition stands disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. 20.06.2025 NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No Lm
To 1.The Superintending Engineer (Electrical), TANGEDCO, Door No.110/11KV, S.S. Complex, Samayanallur, Madurai - 625 402.
2.The Assistant Engineer, TANGEDCO, Sholavandan, Vadipatti Taluk, Madurai - 625 214.
C.SARAVANAN,J.
Lm 20.06.2025