Judgment · High Court
Case at a glance
- Bench
- L VICTORIA GOWRI
Outcome
Disposed of
In view of the above, the Writ Petition is disposed of
Provisions considered
- Constitution of India art. 226
Key paragraphs
- Para 44.C.Prabhakaran ... Respondents (R4 is impleaded vide Court order dated 05.12.2024 in W.M.P.(MD)No.24523 of 2024 in W.P.(MD)No.27091 of 2024 by LVGJ)PRAYER : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records…
Judgment
W.P.(MD)No.27091 of 2024 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURTDated : 06.01.2025CORAM:THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE L.VICTORIA GOWRIW.P.(MD)No.27091 of 2024V.Chandrasekar ... PetitionerVs.
The Executive Superintending Engineer, The Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation Limited (TANGEDCO), Srivilliputhur, Virudhunagar District.
The Executive Assistant Engineer, The Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation Limited (TANGEDCO), Srivilliputhur, Virudhunagar District.
The Assistant Engineer, The Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation Limited (TANGEDCO), Padikasuvaithanpatti, Virudhunagar District.
C.Prabhakaran ... Respondents (R4 is impleaded vide Court order dated 05.12.2024 in W.M.P.(MD)No.24523 of 2024 in W.P.(MD)No.27091 of 2024 by LVGJ)PRAYER : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records pertaining to the impugned order passed by the 3rd respondent by his 1/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD)No.27091 of 2024proceedings in E.Mi.Po/P/Padikasuvaithanpatti/Ko.Appln cancelled intimate A.No.320/23 dated 03.08.2023 and quash the same as illegal and consequently direct the third respondent provide electricity connection to the petitioner house bearing Door No.124, North Karisalkulam, Padikasuvaithanpatti, Srivilliputhur, Virudhunagar District. For Petitioner : Mr.M.Beema RaoFor Respondents 1 to 3 : Mr.S.Deenadhayalan Standing CounselFor 4th Respondent : Mr.A.BalakrishnanORDERChallenging the impugned order of the 3rd respondent dated 03.08.2023, refusing to provide electricity connection to the petitioner, this Writ Petition is filed 2.
Heard the learned counsels on either side and carefully perused the entire materials available on record. 3. When the matter was taken up for hearing, the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents 1 to 3 submitted that only on the objection of the impleaded 4th respondent, they were not able to provide electricity connection. 4. The learned counsel for the 4th respondent is not able to submit any proper reason for objecting the respondents 1 to 3 from providing electricity connection to the petitioner. 2/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD)No.27091 of 20245.A careful perusal of the impugned order reveals that the rejection is on the sole ground that the patta stand in the name of the petitioner's father. 6In view of the same, this Court hereby direct the respondents 1 to 3 to provide forthwith electricity connection to the petitioner within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order.
Operative part
7. In view of the above, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs. 06.01.2025 NCC: Yes / NoIndex :Yes / NoInternet: YesMrnTo1.The Executive Superintending Engineer, The Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation Limited (TANGEDCO), Srivilliputhur, Virudhunagar District. 2. The Executive Assistant Engineer, The Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation Limited (TANGEDCO), Srivilliputhur, Virudhunagar District. 3. The Assistant Engineer, The Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation Limited (TANGEDCO), Padikasuvaithanpatti, Virudhunagar District.3/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD)No.27091 of 2024L.VICTORIA GOWRI, J.MrnW.P.(MD)No.27091 of 202406.01.20254/4
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: In view of the above, the Writ Petition is disposed of
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Constitution of India — art. 226.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.