Disposed

K.Kuppusamy v. The Chairman

Madras HC5 Apr 2017WP/29571/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition under Article 226, the petitioner sought disconnection of an agricultural electricity connection. The Court stayed the matter pending the petitioner's submission of a representation and directed the respondent to pass orders within six weeks after hearing parties.

What did the court decide?

The second respondent to pass orders on the petitioner's representation within six weeks after hearing parties.

K.Kuppusamy Vs The Chairman — Service and Employment | Madras HC (2017)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED: 05.04.2017

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE M.M.SUNDRESH

W.P.No.29571 of 2016

K.Kuppusamy

.... Petitioner

Vs. 1.The Chairman, Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, Tamil Nadu Generation and Electricity Distribution Corporation Ltd., Anna Salai, Chennai-600 002.

¶9

2.The Executive Engineer, (O & M), Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, Tamil Nadu Generation and Electricity Distribution Corporation Ltd., Paramathivelur, Namakkal District. ... Respondents

¶10

Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a Writ of mandamus directing the second respondent to disconnect the petitioner's agricultural electricity service connection effected in S.No.121/9, Sozhasiramani Village, Paramathivelur Taluk, Namakkal District in S.C.No.042400031181 for the period of six months.

¶11

For Petitioner : Mr.C.Prakasam

¶12

For Respondents: Mr. S.K.Rameshwar

¶13

ORDER

¶14

The petitioner made a representation to the second respondent stating that in his absence, service connection given to his agricultural land was disconnected. Since no action is forthcoming, the present writ petition has been filed.

¶15

Considering the pendency of the representation, without going into the merits of the case, a direction is issued to the petitioner to send a copy of the representation along with this order within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a

¶16

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

¶17

copy of this order. On receipt of the same, the second respondent is directed pass orders on the said representation dated 12.12.2915, after affording opportunity to the petitioner and the third party, if any, within a period of six weeks thereafter.

¶18

The writ petition stands disposed of accordingly. No costs. Sd/-

¶19

Assistant Registrar

¶20

//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
raa
To
1.The Chairman,
Tamil Nadu Electricity Board,
Tamil Nadu Generation and Electricity
Distribution Corporation Ltd.,
Anna Salai, Chennai-600 002.
2.The Executive Engineer, (O & M),
Tamil Nadu Electricity Board,
Tamil Nadu Generation and Electricity
Distribution Corporation Ltd.,
Paramathivelur, Namakkal District.
+1cc to Mr.Prakasam, Advocate, S.R.No.21077
KK(CO)
RS(17/04/2017)
W.P.No.29571 of 2016

¶21

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

K.Kuppusamy v. The Chairman

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K.Kuppusamy v. The Chairman

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

S.Kamalasaraswathi, Vs The Chairman-cum-Managing

The Management of Doosan Vs The Presiding Officer

M.Veerasamy, Vs Union of India

United Labour Federation Vs The Government of Tamil Nadu

M/s.Diamond Engineering Vs The Regional Providnet Fund

T.Marimuthu, Vs The District Collector