Ramaswamy N v. The Superintendent Of Police
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 02.09.2024 CORAM :
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.MURALI SHANKAR and W.M.P.(MD)No.17571 of 2024 N.Ramaswamy : Petitioner Vs.
1.The Superintendent of Police, O/o.The Superintendent of Police, Kanyakumari District, Nagercoil.
2.The Inspector of Police, Susindram Police Station, Susindram, Kanyakumari District.
3.The Superintending Engineer, O/o.The Superintending Engineer, Kanyakumari Electricity Distribution Circle, Nagercoil.
4.The Assistant Electricity Engineer, (Distribution), TANGEDCO, Susinthram, Kanyakumari District.
5.P.Ganapathy : Respondents 1/5
PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the first respondent herein to take appropriate action on the basis of the petitioner's representation, dated 15.07.2022 and ensure the safety of the petitioner and the petitioner's family including by giving police protection to the petitioner's life and limb.
For Petitioner : Mr.D.Anbarasu For Respondents : Mr.E.Antony Sahaya Prabahar, Additional Public Prosecutor, for R1 and R2.
: Mr.Deenadhayalan, Standig Counsel, for R3 and R4.
O R D E R
This writ petitioner filed this Writ Petition seeking for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, to direct the first respondent herein to take appropriate action on the basis of the petitioner's representation, dated 15.07.2022 and ensure the safety of the petitioner and the petitioner's family including by giving police protection to the petitioner's life and limb.
2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner has taken the property in dispute on lease from Kasi 2/5
Thirumadam and in possession of the same and that the fifth respondent, who is having no right in the property, has been interfering with the petitioner's possession and enjoyment of the property. He would further submit that the respondents 3 and 4 have given electricity connection in favour of the fifth respondent, without considering the lease standing in favour of the petitioner.
3. But the learned counsel for the third respondent would submit that they have not given electricity connection either in favour of the petitioner or in favour of the fifth respondent, but to some other person.
4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the State would submit that on the basis of the representation of the petitioner , dated 15.07.2022, enquiry is pending in current paper.
5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the second respondent is directed to issue written summons to the petitioner as well the private respondent for causing their appearance before him for enquiry and to conduct enquiry and pass orders within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order.
3/5
6. With the above direction, this Writ Petition stands disposed of. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed. No costs. 02.09.2024 NCC : Yes/ No Index :Yes/No Internet : Yes/ No das To 1.The Superintendent of Police, O/o.The Superintendent of Police, Kanyakumari District, Nagercoil.
2.The Inspector of Police, Susindram Police Station, Susindram, Kanyakumari District.
3.The Superintending Engineer, O/o.The Superintending Engineer, Kanyakumari Electricity Distribution Circle, Nagercoil.
4.The Assistant Electricity Engineer, (Distribution), TANGEDCO, Susinthram, Kanyakumari District.
5.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.
4/5
K.MURALI SHANKAR, J das Order made in and W.M.P.(MD)No.17571 of 2024 02.09.2024 5/5