Disposed

K.R.Vellaisamy, v. the Executive Engineer

Madras HC22 Dec 2014WP(MD)/20864/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court directed the electricity authority to consider a fresh application by a Freedom Fighter petitioner for supply to his dwelling in disputed land. The Court ordered the Respondent to pass an order on merits within two weeks based on an indemnity bond submitted with a fresh representation.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed; Petitioner directed to submit fresh application with enclosures and indemnity bond within three days; Respondent to consider application and pass order on merits within two wee

K.R.Vellaisamy, Vs the Executive Engineer — Service and Employment | Madras HC (2014)

¶1

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED:22.12.2014

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.VENUGOPAL

¶6

W.P.(MD)No.20864 of 2014

¶7

K.R.Vellaisamy ... Petitioner

¶8

Vs.

¶9

1.The Executive Engineer, Operations & Maintenance, Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation, Trichy East, Mannarpuram, Trichy - 20. 2.The Assistant Executive Engineer, Operations & Maintenance, Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation, Thiruverumbur, Trichy. 3.The Assistant Engineer, Operations & Maintenance, Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation, Navalpattu, Trichy - 16. ... Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a writ of Mandamus, directing the Respondents 1 to 3 to give electricity supply to the Petitioner's house in Door No.6/286 A, comprised in Survey No.310/1 situated at Vivasaya Thottam, Navapattu Village, Anna Nagar, Trichy - 26 on executing the indemnity bond under Clause 27(4) of Tamil Nadu Electricity Distribution Code, 2004, without insisting revenue records from the Tahsildar.

¶10

For Petitioner : Mr.R.R.Kannan

¶11

For Respondents : M/s.SMS.Johny Basha

¶12

Standing Counsel O R D E R

¶13

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶14

Heard the Learned Counsel for the Petitioner and the

¶15

Learned Standing Counsel for the Respondents.

¶16

¶17

According to the Petitioner, he is an Indian National Army freedom fighter and joined in the Indian Independence League at Rangoon, Burma and thereafter, he shifted his residence to India and he is drawing Freedom Fighter's Pension from the State Government in terms of G.O.No.14049, dated 26.04.2010.

¶18

3.It comes to be known that the Petitioner's family was allotted 5 acres of poramboke land comprised in Survey No.310/1 situated at Navalpattu Village in Trichirapalli District. The barren land was transformed into a cultivable land and he has constructed a small house for his family's dwelling. The house was provided with electricity connection by the third Respondent in Electricity Connection No.417. It was subsequently disconnected on 14.03.2005 stating that the Writ Petition in W.P(MD)No.9377 of 2011 was pending on the file of this Court. Moreover, the third Respondent informed that the land in question belonged to the Tamil Nadu Housing Board. It transpires that the Petitioner has preferred W.A(MD)No.121 of 2013 against the District Collector, Trichirapalli District and three others before this court(Division Bench) and this Court on 31.01.2013 in M.P(MD)No.1 of 2013 in W.A (MD)No.121 of 2013, had inter alia passed an order of status-quo as on date in respect of possession of the dwelling house and is directed the matter to be called after four weeks. It is represented on behalf of the Petitioner that the said Writ Appeal is pending on the file of this Court till date. The real grievance of the Petitioner is that his Grandsons and Granddaughters are living with him and they are finding it difficult to read books without proper lighting. Also, his aged wife is finding it difficult to live in the dwelling house since often snakes and other reptiles are also enter into the house. Also that on earlier occasion, he sent a representation to the District Collector on 01.07.2013 for restoration of electricity supply to his dwelling house. But the first Respondent/Executive Engineer, Operations & Maintenance, TNG & DC, Trichy - 20, had informed through his communication, dated 24.07.2013 that a case is pending against the petitioner's place of residence. Also, it is brought to the notice of this Court that the Petitioner received a communication from the third Respondent on 09.07.2013 stating that no litigation is pending before any Court and the third Respondent informed him to bring the documents in support of his dwelling house.

¶19

At this juncture, the Learned Counsel for the Petitioner seeks in aid of Clause 27(2)(4) and Clause 27(2)(12) of the Tamil Nadu Electricity Distribution Code, which states that for a residential area, electricity supply can be provided after obtaining indemnity bond in Form VI of Annexure III of the Tamil Nadu Electricity Distribution Code. Advancing his arguments, the https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ Learned Counsel for the Petitioner proceeds to project an argument that the Petitioner has been issued with Family Card, Voters I.D. Card and as on date he is receiving freedom fighters pension from

¶20

¶21

the State Government and as such, there is no impediment on the part of the Respondents to provide electricity supply to the Petitioner's house at Door No.6/286 A, comprised in Survey No.310/1 situated at Vivasaya Thottam, Navapattu Village, Anna Nagar, Trichy - 26 on executing the indemnity bond under Clause 27 (4) of Tamil Nadu Electricity Distribution Code, 2004.

¶22

The Learned Counsel for the Petitioner cites the decision of this Court in G. Murugan v. Chairman, Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, Chennai and two others(2014) 3 MLJ 851 , whereby and whereunder it is observed and held as follows:

¶23

" In the decision of this Court in A.Muthusamy v. Assistant Engineer, TNEB, Tirunelveli, it is held that an electricity connection can be given to persons who are in occupation of premises even if their ownership is under dispute provided they furnish indemnity bond and pay necessary fee, etc. Also, it is held that electricity supply can be given in Poramboke land as per directives of Government issued from time to time.

¶24

On a careful consideration of respective contentions and this Court taking note of the fact that the Petitioner had submitted an application before the Tamil Nadu Electricity Board(Second Respondent) seeking electricity connection to his premises for which no written orders till date were passed by the 2nd Respondent negating his request[although the claim of the Petitioner was that the 2nd Respondent had orally rejected his claim] and also this Court, taking note of a person's right to lead a life with dignity, in the interest of Fair Play, Good Conscience, Equity and even as a matter of prudence, directs the Petitioner to enclose a copy of the application, together with all requisite enclosures like, family card, nativity certificate, Documents(copy of Sale Deed as proof of his purchases etc.) and various Court Orders, which he relies upon in his favour seeking supply of Electricity, within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order. Further, on receipt of such application being made, the 2nd Respondent is directed to consider the Petitioner's application seeking supply of electricity to his residential house, in a just, fair, Objective and Dispassionate manner and to pass a reasoned speaking order on merits(by specifying the outline of process of reasoning with quantitative and qualitative details) in the light of the ingredients of the Electricity Act, 2003, Tamil Nadu Electricity Supply Code, 2004 and also bearing in mind the tenor and spirit https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ of the decisions cited supra by this Court."

¶25

¶26

In the decision S.Rajakumari V. Chairman, Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, Chennai and Others,(2007) 1 MLJ 241 at page 242 , wherein it is held as follows:

¶27

A plain reading of Rule 27(12) of Code clarifies that the Board is under the obligation to provide supply. As the word used is "shall", such supply shall be given even in a Poramboke land on production of necessary documents.

¶28

The Petitioners have produced their ration cards and voters identity cards, which are issued by the State. Therefore, those documents are sufficient to conclude that they are the necessary documents. The only problem of the Respondents is the objection raised by the P.W.D. authorities have got any right to object for giving any service connection."

¶29

In the decision Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, rep. by its Superintending Engineer, Coimbatore Electricity System, Coimbatore and Others V. R.Raja, (2007) 5 MLJ 1297 at special page 1298, it is observed and held as under:

¶30

"The Electricity Board has the responsibility to properly conduct inspection, inform the consumer of electricity about the inspection and give the consumer opportunity in compliance with the principles of natural justice. Not having done so the Electricity Board's order to disconnect supply of electricity of plaintiff was unsustainable.”

¶31

Also, in the decision Divisional Engineer (West), T.N.E.B. V. J.Rajendra Prasad, 2007 (3) MLJ 282 (Mad), it is held as follows:

¶32

"Under the Terms and Conditions of Supply of Electricity, Electricity Board has the responsibility to pass initial assessment of notice and then, show cause notice and final order should be passed only after conducting enquiry after giving opportunity to the customer, otherwise, it would result in violation of principles of natural justice and is not enforceable in law.”

¶33

In the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Special Officer, Commerce, North Eastern Electricity Supply Company of Orissa (NESCO) and another, V. Raghunath Paper Mills Private Limited and another, (2012) 13 Supreme Court Cases 479, it is held as follows:

¶34

"Subject to fulfilment of conditions, distributing licensee is duty-bound to supply electricity within one https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ month after receipt of application from owner or occupier."

¶35

¶36

Apart from the above, it cannot be brush aside that the Electricity Board can supply electricity subject to the execution of indemnity bond in the prescribed form as opined by this Court. Further just because power supply was provided/given to a person, the same does confirm ownership over the disputed land as per the decision P.Arumugam v. Government of Tamil Nadu, through its Secretary, Energy (C-3) Department, Secretariat, Chennai- 600 009 and three others, 2003 Writ L.R. at 248 . In reality, the Electricity Board is vested with the power to alter, vary, modify or delete any of the terms and conditions of the supply and no notice is required as per the decision Madura Coats Limited, Madurai v. State of Tamil Nadu, 2005, 5 CTC 133.

¶37

In the instant case on hand, the petitioner has given his family card, voter I.D. and also that he is a freedom fighter receiving pension from the State Government. These documents are necessary documents so as to enable the Respondents to come to a conclusion/arrive at a conclusion in regard to the supply of electricity to the Petitioner's house.

¶38

In the light of upshot of detailed discussions mentioned supra and since the Petitioner only seeks for passing of an order by this Court in directing the Respondents 1 to 3 to provide electricity supply to his house in door No. No.6/286 A, comprised in Survey No.310/1 situated at Vivasaya Thottam, Navapattu Village, Anna Nagar, Trichy - 26 on executing the indemnity bond under Clause 27(4) of Tamil Nadu Electricity Distribution Code, 2004, this Court in the interest of justice, Equity, based on Good Conscience, fair play and on balance, directs the Petitioner to submit a fresh

¶39

representation/application, within a period of three days together with all requisite enclosures like family card, nativity certificate and other connected documents which he relies upon in his favour seeking supply of electricity, to the third Respondent. Further, on receipt of such application/representation being made, the third Respondent is directed to consider the Petitioner's application, seeking supply of electricity to his residential is without any delay or procrastination and to pass orders on merits in providing electricity supply to the Petitioner's house more fully and particularly described in the petition by obtaining an indemnity bond under Clause 27(4) of the Tamil Nadu Electricity Distribution Code and also in the light of ingredients of the Electricity Act, 2003, within a period of two weeks thereafter (ofcourse after providing due opportunities to the petitioner and others concerned if any by adhering the principles of natural justice).

¶40

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶41

¶42

With the aforesaid observations and directions, the Writ Petition stands disposed of. No Costs.

¶43

Sd/Assistant Registrar(RTI)

¶44

/True Copy/

¶45

Sub-Assistant Registrar

¶46

To 1.The Executive Engineer, Operations & Maintenance, Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation, Trichy East, Mannarpuram, Trichy - 20. 2.The Assistant Executive Engineer, Operations & Maintenance, Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation, Thiruverumbur, Trichy. 3.The Assistant Engineer, Operations & Maintenance, Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation, Navalpattu, Trichy – 16. +One cc to Mr.R.R.Kannan, Advocate, SR.No.68412

¶47

pm RL/5 c- 8/1/2015 W.P.(MD)No.20864 of 2014

¶48

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶49

22.12.2014

K.R.Vellaisamy, v. the Executive Engineer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K.R.Vellaisamy, v. the Executive Engineer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

T.Balasundarambal, Vs the State of Tamil Nadu

Arayar Srinivasan, Vs the Secretary

V.Thangavelu, Vs the District Collector

Kathiresan, Vs the Supdt.of Police

Manimuthu, Vs the Assistant Engineer

A.Karuppuchami Vs the Superintendent of Police