Samiyappa Gounder, v. The Superintending[amended]
Case brief
What is this about?
This Writ Petition sought to quash a notice regarding electricity pole erection. The Court held that the matter is premature as civil proceedings are pending and the application was not rejected. It directed the Assistant Engineer to consider objections, inspect the site, and pass a speaking order within four weeks.
What did the court decide?
Directed the second respondent to consider objections, inspect the site, and pass a speaking order within four weeks.
What the court decided
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED :: 10-03-2016
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.S.SIVAGNANAM
W.P.No.10591 OF 2015
Samiyappa Gounder ...Petitioner
-Vs-
1.The Superintending Engineer, TANGEDCO, Tiruppur, Tiruppur District.
2.The Assistant Engineer, TANGEDCO, Uthukuli, Avinashi Taluk, Tiruppur District.
3.Chennimalai Gounder ...Respondents
Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for issuance of a writ of certiorari, to call for the records pertaining to the proceedings of the second respondent in Ka.No.U.Mi.Po/Ki/Ukuli/Locut/A.80/14, dated 20.11.2014 and quash the same as illegal, incompetent and consequently direct the second respondent to give electricity connection to the petitioner's dwelling house at 1/36, Chinnegounden Palayam, Punjai Thalavaipuram, Perundurai, Erode District.
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the High Court should decide the disputed question regarding the right to enjoy the cart track in pending civil proceedings.
Whether the impugned communication from the responding authority is a final order capable of being quashed.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
Samiyappa Gounder
- respondent
The Superintending Engineer, TANGEDCO, Tiruppur
- respondent
The Assistant Engineer, TANGEDCO, Uthukuli
- respondent
Chennimalai Gounder
Coram
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court