Madras High CourtWP(MD)/8651/2018dismissed

A.Sakthivel, v. The District Collector

2025-10-15Honourable Ms. Justice P.T. Asha7 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 15.10.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE P.T.ASHA Writ Petition(MD)No.8651 of 2018 A.Sakthivel ... Petitioner Vs 1.The District Collector, Dindigul District, Dindigul.

2.The District Revenue Officer, Dindigul District, Dindigul.

3.The Sub-Collector, Palani, Dindigul District.

4.The Tahsildar, Vedasanthur Taluk, Dindigul District.

5.Superintending Engineer, Dindigul Distribution Circle, and Distribution Corporaiton (TANGEDCO), Meenakshinayakkanpatti, Dindigul District.

6.The Executive Engineer -North Meenakshinayakkanpatti, Dindigul District.

1/7

7.The Assistant Executive Engineer, Kujiliamparai Distribution Section, Kujiliamparai, Dindigul District.

8.P.R.Subramanian ... Respondents Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus, to direct the respondents 5 to 7 to disconnect the Agricultural Electricity connection bearing Service Connection No.216-023-773 stands in S.No.663/3B in the name of Raju the father of the 8th respondent within a time limit that may be stipulated by this Court.

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Saravanakumar For Respondents : Mr.D.Sasikumar Additional Government Pleader for R1 to R4 Mr.S.Deenadhayalan Standing Counsel (for R5 to R7) Ms.V.Jeyarani (for R8)

ORDER

The writ petition has been filed to direct the respondents 5 to 7 to disconnect the Agricultural Electricity connection bearing Service Connection No.216-023-773 stands in S.No.663/3B in the name of Raju, the father of the 8th respondent, within a time limit that may be stipulated by this Court. 2/7

2. It is the case of the petitioner that he had purchased the property to an extent of 3.98 Acres and 10 cents in S.No.663/3C and S.No.663/3B respectively, in R.Kombai Village, Vedasanthur Taluk, under a registered sale deed dated 26.02.2009. Subsequent to the purchase of the property, the petitioner has got the revenue records mutated in respect of the above properties. The petitioner would submit that the fourth respondent had issued joint patta for 10 cents in S.No.663/3B and one Subban Chettiar was issued patta for the remaining 10 cents in S.No.663/3B.

3. While so, the father of the eighth respondent had produced a false and forged document in the year 2006 stating that the entire 10 cents of lands in S.No.663/3B belonged to him and obtained a forged patta. On the basis of the above, his father had obtained agricultural electricity connection in respect of the above lands. On coming to know about the same, the petitioner had traced the records and discovered that the 8th respondent's father had mutated the revenue records and obtained patta in Patta No.2043 and after his demise, his legal representatives claimed the same. All these came to be known in response to the RTI query. The petitioner had challenged the order passed by the third respondent granting the joint patta in W.P(MD).No.1837 of 2018. The writ petition was disposed of on 31.01.2018 directing the petitioner to approach the second respondent by filing appeal. Accordingly, the petitioner has also filed 3/7

an appeal before the second respondent on 12.03.2018 and the same was pending before the second respondent. Thereafter, the petitioner had made a detailed representation to the respondents 5 to 7 on 25.01.2018 requesting them to disconnect the agricultural electricity connection bearing service connection No.216-213-773 and the pole installed in his land in S.No.663/3B by the 8th respondent and his family members. Though the representation was received, the same was not considered in accordance with law and therefore, the petitioner is before this Court.

4. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner.

5. A mere perusal of the affidavit would clearly indicate that the service connection to the 8th respondent's father had been granted as early as in the year 2006. The pole has also been fixed in S.No.663/3B in that very year. The petitioner has not taken any steps for over 12 years and he has woken up only in the year 2018 to the fact that the electricity service connection as well the pole erected are all in his property.

6. Considering the fact that for over 12 years, the 8th respondent and his family members have been enjoying the electricity service connection uninterruptedly, this Court is of the considered view that the petitioner had 4/7

approached this Court with an unexplained delay and the writ petition is hit by latches. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is dismissed. No costs. 15.10.2025 NCC : Yes/No Index : Yes/No Internet:Yes Rmk To 1.The District Collector, Dindigul District, Dindigul.