Vijaya v. The Chief Engineer

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 18.11.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN and W.M.P.(MD)Nos.22689 & 20258 of 2025 Vijaya ... Petitioner Vs.

1.The Chief Engineer, Non Conventional Energy Sources (NCES) Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, No.144, Anna Salai, Chennai-600 002.

2.The Superintending Engineer, Non-Conventional Energy Sources (NCES) Wind Energy Development Circle, Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, Tirunelveli District-627 011.

3.The District Collector, Collectorate, Thoothukudi District.

4.The District Revenue Officer, Thoothukudi District, Thoothukudi.

5.The Tahsildar, Srivaigundam Taluk Office, Thoothukudi District.

1/5

6.M/s.Vels Energy Solutions, No.3, First Floor, Balaji Nagar, Palladam Road, Tiruppur District-641 605.

7.Lavendor Ecopower Private Limited, Coimbatore.

(R7 is suo motu impleaded vide Court dated 19.09.2025 in W.M.P.(MD)No.20258/25 by GRSJ) ... Respondents Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus, to forbear the 6th respondent from installing Wind Mill in the land situated at S.No.151, Alantha Village, Srivaigundam Taluk, Thoothukudi District adjacent to operational stone quarry without following the due process of law, based on petitioner's representation dated 08.09.2025.

For Petitioner : Mr.M.Jerin Mathew For Respondents : Mr.M.Lingadurai Special Government Pleader for R3 to R5 : Mr.S.Deenadhayalan for R1 & R2 : Mr.R.Rajamohan for Mr.P.Dhamodaran for R6 & R7 2/5

ORDER

Heard both sides.

2. This writ petition has been filed in the nature of writ of mandamus to forbear the sixth respondent from installing the wind mill in the petition mentioned land. In fact, it is the 7th respondent who is setting up the project.

3. Since proper permission had not been obtained, I had granted an order of injunction on 19.09.2025. However, I made it clear that the authorities were at liberty to process the application submitted by the 7th respondent. It is stated by the learned standing counsel for TNEB that permission was granted on 26.09.2025. The jurisdictional Tahsidar had conducted spot inspection and he has made it clear that distance between the quarry site and the wind mill generator site is around 365 meters. The 7th respondent gives an undertaking before this Court that in future, when the writ petitioner seeks renewal of his quarry lease, they will not raise any objection. By setting up the generator, the right of the petitioner is not in any way infringed. The distance rule has not been breached. The seventh respondent has undertaken before this Court they will not interfere with the petitioner's quarry activities in future also. This should more than protect the rights of the petitioner. Interim order earlier 3/5

granted stand vacated and closed. The respondents 6 & 7 can very well carry on with their activities setting up their unit. The location of the wind mill cannot be an impediment for construing the distance rule to the prejudice of the writ petitioner.

4. The writ petition is disposed of accordingly. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. 18.11.2025 Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes/ No rmi To 1.The District Collector, Collectorate, Thoothukudi District.

2.The District Revenue Officer, Thoothukudi District, Thoothukudi.

3.The Tahsildar, Srivaigundam Taluk Office, Thoothukudi District.

4/5

G.R.SWAMINATHAN, J.

rmi 18.11.2025 5/5