M.Senthilkumar v. The Superintendent Engineer

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 16.04.2026

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR M.Senthilkumar ... Petitioner vs.

1.The Superintendent Engineer, Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation Ltd., Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, Meenatchi Nayakkanpatty, Dindigul District.

2.The Assistant Engineer, Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation Ltd., Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, Natham Road, Ponnakaram, Dindigul East Taluk, Dindigul District.

3.The Executive Engineer, Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation Ltd., Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, Meenatchi Nayakkanpatty, Dindigul District.

4.The Junior Engineer, Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation Ltd., Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, Meenatchi Nayakkanpatty, Dindigul District.

... Respondents 1/5

PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of Mandamus, to direct the respondents to restore the electricity connection vide E.B.No.200052380324342 to the petitioner situated at Thottanuthu Village, Dindigul, Dindigul District, by considering the petitioner's representation dated 15.11.2024 within the period that may be stipulated by this Court.

For Petitioner :Mr.H.Mohammed Imran for M/s.Ajmal Associates For Respondents :Mr.S.Deenadhayalan *****

O R D E R

The petitioner has approached this Court seeking issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to restore the agricultural electricity service connection to the petitioner's land situated at Thottanuthu Village, Dindigul, Dindigul District, by considering the petitioner's representation dated 15.11.2024.

2. Heard Mr. H. Mohammed Imran, learned counsel for the petitioner, and Mr. S. Deenadhayalan, learned counsel appearing for the respondents.

2/5

3. Mr. S. Deenadhayalan, learned counsel for the respondents, upon instructions, submitted that the petitioner's application for providing power supply to his agricultural land had been rejected on account of objections raised by the petitioner's sister. Since no electricity service connection had ever been provided to the petitioner's land, there is no question of restoring any service connection.

4. In view of the above, nothing further survives for adjudication. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is disposed of, preserving liberty to the petitioner to submit a fresh application for sanction of power supply to the petitioner's agricultural land. If such an application is submitted, the third respondent shall consider the same on its own merits and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law.

5. The aforesaid exercise shall be completed within a period of four (4) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

6. It is made clear that the third respondent shall not reject the application to be submitted by the petitioner merely on the ground of 3/5

pendency of a civil suit, if any, unless there is an order of restraint operating against the petitioner.

7. There shall be no order as to costs.

Index :Yes / No 16.04.2026 Internet :Yes / No NCC :Yes / No cmr 4/5

HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR, J.

cmr 16.04.2026 5/5