High Court · 2007

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDATED :12.06.2007 C O R A M :THE HONOURABLE MR.A.P.SHAH, THE CHIEF JUSTICEANDTHE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.JYOTHIMANIW.A.No. 174 of 2007 and W.P.No.10228 of 2006and connected miscellaneous petitions.W.A.No.174 of 2007:D. Shankar ... Appellant-vs-1.Mr. Chidambaram Gopalrep. By its Power of AttorneyMrs. Geetha Sunda.2.Tamil Nadu Electricity Boardrep. By its Chairman100 Anna SalaiChennai 600 002.3.The Assistant EngineerKoyambedu Commercial Complex DivisionTamil Nadu Electricity BoardChennai Electricity Distribution Circle (West)Chennai 600 106. ... RespondentsWrit Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent against theorder of the learned single Judge dated 21.12.2006 made inWPMP.No.11569 of 2006 in W.P.No.10228 of 2006.Petition praying to grant interim direction directing therespondents to give temporary; Servicte Connection to the premises atPlot No. 14, Door No. 15/2 Mangamma Nagar Srinivasan Nagar Extension,Koyembedu, Chennai.Writ Petition No.10228 of 2006:Mr. Chidambaram Gopalrep. By its Power of AttorneyMrs. Geetha Sunda... Petitionervs.1. Tamil Nadu Electricity Boardrep. By its Chairman100 Anna SalaiChennai 600 002. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

2. The Assistant EngineerKoyambedu Commercial Complex DivisionTamil Nadu Electricity BoardChennai Electricity Distribution Circle (West)Chennai 600 106.3.D. Shankar.. RespondentsWrit Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution ofIndia, praying for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus as stated therein.For appellant in WA :: Mr. V. Ayyadurai and for the 3rd respondent in WP. For Ist respondents in WA andfor the Petitioner in WP :: Mr. K.M. Vijayan, Sr. Counsel for M/s. La & Law for R1. For Respondents 2 & 3 in WA and Respondents 1 & 2 in WP :: Mr. R. Subbiah for R.2 & 3(TNEB) COMMON JUDGMENT ( DELIVERED BY P.JYOTHIMANI,J.)This writ appeal is directed against the order of the learnedsingle Judge passed in WPMP.No.11569 of 2006 in W.P.No.10228 of 2006dated 21.12.2006. The first respondent herein, filed the said writpetition for direction against respondents 2 and 3, viz., Tamil NaduElectricity Board to give electricity connection to the premises at PlotNo.14, Door No.15/2. Mangamma Nagar, Srinivasa Nagar Extension,Koyambedu, Chennai 600 092. The appellant herein was made as thirdrespondent in the writ petition.2. By consent, the writ petition is also taken up for finaldisposal.3. The case of the first respondent herein, who is the writpetitioner is that, he is the owner of the property at Plot No.14 inDoor No.15/2 Mangamma Nagar, Srinivasa Nagar Extension, Koyambedu,Chennai 600 092. He has applied for electricity service connection inrespect of the said plot. It was, at that time, the third respondent inthe writ petition, who has filed the present appeal has raised anobjection, and it was, due to the objection raised by him, the secondrespondent has not given electricity connection to the said plot. Inthose circumstances, the first respondent/writ petitioner, has alsoapproached the Civil Court by filing O.S.No.7360 of 2005, and pendingthe said suit, he has also filed I.A.No.21585 of 2005, praying forinterim injunction against the third respondent in the writ petition,from interfering with the construction activities and also peacefulpossession of Plot No.14, Mangamma Nagar, Srinivasa Nagar Extension,Koyambedu, Chennai 600 092. The Civil Court has also granted injunctionand the said injunction order is in force as on today. Even thereafter,when the writ petitioner approached the Electricity Board for connection https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ in respect of the newly built-up superstructure at Plot No.14, MangammaNagar, Srinivasa Nagar Extension, Koyambedu, Chennai 600 092, theElectricity Board has not given service connection on the basis that thethird respondent has objected for granting of the same. It was, inthose circumstances, the writ petition came to be filed. Pending thewrit petition, the writ petitioner has also filed WPMP.No.11569 of 2006,for interim direction against the Electricity Board to give temporaryconnection for the premises at Plot No.14, Mangamma Nagar, SrinivasaNagar Extension, Koyambedu, Chennai 600 092. It is the grievance of thethird respondent in the writ petition, who is the appellant herein that,in the said WPMP., he was not made as a party and an order of interimdirection was granted by the learned single Judge on 21.12.2006, againstwhich the third respondent in the writ petition has filed the presentappeal.4. We have heard learned counsel for the appellant as well asthe respondents.5. It is the admitted case of the appellant, who is the thirdrespondent in the writ petition that he is the owner of Plot No.3 inDoor No.15/2 Mangamma Nagar, Srinivasa Nagar Extension, Koyambedu,Chennai 600 092 and he has got service connection for his property.The grievance of the appellant is that, in the guise of getting serviceconnection in Plot No.14, Mangamma Nagar, Koyambedu Village, Chennai 600092, the first respondent is pointing out Plot No.3, which belong to theappellant and it was in that view the objection was made. In fact, theappellant has also filed a suit in O.S.No.3116 of 2005 on the file ofCity Civil Court, Chennai, for permanent injunction in respect of hisproperty and against the first respondent herein and the said suit isalso pending. 6. When the writ appeal came up for admission, we have directedthe learned counsel for the second and third respondents, Tamil NaduElectricity Board, to get instruction about giving of fresh connectionas a temporary measure to the property, viz., Plot No.14 Mangamma Nagar,Koyambedu Village, Chennai 600 092, of the first respondent. 7. Mr. R. Subbiah, on instruction would submit that, since thefirst respondent, who is seeking service connection for Plot No.14Mangamma Nagar, Koyambedu Village, Chennai 600 092, is actually showingPlot No.3 belonging to the appellant, in which there is already aservice connection in existence and therefore, there cannot be anyfresh service connection for Plot No.3 once again.8. On the other hand, it is admitted by the learned counsel forthe appellant as well as the first respondent that, appellant is theowner of Plot No.3 and the first respondent is the owner of Plot No.14and in respect of Plot No.3 belonging to the appellant, there is alreadya service connection in existence. What is required is that, the firstrespondent, who is the writ petitioner, has put up a new construction inhis property at Plot No.14, Mangamma Nagar, Srinivasa Nagar Extension,Koyambedu, Chennai 600 092, and therefore he requires service connectionindependently to his plot, to which, he is the owner. 9. On the face of the above said admitted facts, we are of theview that the writ petition has to be disposed of with direction to https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ the second and third respondents, Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, toprovide fresh service connection to Plot No.14, Mangamma Nagar,Srinivasa Nagar Extension, Koyambedu, Chennai 600 092, belonging to thefirst respondent as an interim measure till the suits filed by theappellant in O.S.No.3116 of 2005 and the first respondent in O.S.No.7360of 2005, are disposed of by the civil court. This arrangement is madein the interest of both parties, since the first respondent having putup a construction in Plot No.14, Mangamma Nagar, Koyambedu Village,Chennai 600 092, cannot be denied electricity service connection atleasttill the dispute before the civil court is decided between the appellantand first respondent.10. In view of the above said facts and for the reasons statedabove, while confirming the order of the learned single Judge passed inWPMP.No.11569 of 2006 in WP.No.10228 of 2006, we dismiss the writ appealand the writ petition is disposed of in the following terms. (i) The second and third respondents, viz., TamilNadu Electricity Board, shall give electricityservice connection in favour of the first respondentin W.A.No.173 of 2007 in respect of Plot No.14,Mangamma Nagar, Koyambedu Village, Chennai 600 092,as an interim measure, on payment of necessarycharges in accordance with law;(ii)The electricity service connection, which is inexistence in Plot No.3, relating to the appellant'sproperty shall continue to exist;(iii) After disposal of the civil suits inO.S.No.3116 of 2005 and O.S.No.7360 of 2005, filedby the appellant and the first respondentrespectively, and based on that decision, second andthird respondents shall decide finally about thepermanent connection to the property of the firstrespondent in respect of Plot No.14, Mangamma Nagar,Koyambedu Village, Chennai 600 092.There is no order as to costs in the appeal as well as in writpetition. Connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. khSd/Asst. Registrar/true copy/Sub Asst.RegistrarTo1.The Chairman Tamil Nadu Electricity Board100 Anna SalaiChennai 600 002. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

2.The Assistant EngineerKoyambedu Commercial Complex DivisionTamil Nadu Electricity BoardChennai Electricity Distribution Circle (West)Chennai 600 106.+ One cc to Mr. M. Ganeshan Advocate SR 33801+ One cc to M/s La & Law Advocate SR 33778NG (co)sg 21/6/07 W.A.No.174 of 2007 andWP.No.10228/06 12.06.2007