Disposed

Ambikapathy (Deceased) v. the Assistant Executive

Madras HC7 Jun 2019WP/29944/2007

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A writ petition sought a direction to grant an electricity service connection. The High Court noted the petitioner was not in occupation when inspected, directing them to file a fresh application with tenancy proof and residential details for consideration.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to file a fresh application with tenancy and residential proof; 1st respondent directed to consider it and pass orders on merits.

Ambikapathy (Deceased) Vs the Assistant Executive — Service and Employment | Madras HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 07.06.2019

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI

¶5

W.P.No.29944 of 2007
and
M.P.No.1 of 2007
1.Amkbikapathy (deceased)
2.Kokila
3.Stalin
4.Raghunathan
5.Ravikumar
6.Rathidevi
7.Kannan
(P2 to 7 are substituted as LRs of P1
as per order dated 27.07.2014)
...Petitioners
Vs.
1.The Assistant Executive Engineer
Tamil Nadu Electricity Board
Chennai
2.K.Muthuvel
... Respondents

¶6

Prayer: The writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a writ of Mandamus to direct the 1^st respondent to grant separate Electricity service connection in the name of the petitioner in respect of the property situates at Door No.44, North Mada Street, Villivakkam, Chennai-49.

¶7

For Petitioners : Mr.V.Ragavachari For Respondents : Mr.P.R.Dhilip Kumar for R1

¶8

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

¶9

O R D E R

¶10

The writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a writ of Mandamus to direct the 1^st respondent to grant separate Electricity service connection in the name of the petitioner in respect of the property situates at Door No.44, North Mada Street, Villivakkam, Chennai-49.

¶11

2.The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is a tenant in the property situated at Door No.44, North Mada Street, Villivakkam, Chennai-49 under the tenancy agreement dated 23.02.1980 for the non residential purpose under the 2^nd respondent. The petitioner is in continuous possession of the aforesaid property for over the period of 25 years on the basis of agreed rents, he was carrying on textile business in the said premises. However, due to the sudden fall in the production of the textile industry, the petitioner was not able to run the business continuously in the said premises and subsequently, there was a dispute between the petitioner and the landlord. Hence, the electricity supply to the premises in the petitioner's possession got disconnected. Therefore, the petitioner made an application to the Electricity Board for the electricity connection, the same was not considered by the authorities.

¶12

3.The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that though the writ petition was filed in the year 2007, however, till date the electricity connection was not made ready. Accordingly, prays for appropriate relief.

¶13

4.The learned standing counsel appearing for the TNEB would submit, that when the authorities visited the premises to restore electricity connection, they found that the petitioner was not in occupation of the premises. Hence, his representation could not be considered.

¶14

5.Considering the above submissions made by the learned counsel for the 1^st respondent, this court is inclined to direct the petitioner to file a fresh application along with the residential proof and tenancy agreement to the 1^st respondent for ready reference. Thereafter, the 1^st respondent is hereby directed to consider the application once the same is filed by the petitioner along with the residential proof and tenancy agreement and pass appropriate orders on merits and in accordance with law.

¶15

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

¶16

6.This writ petition stands disposed of accordingly. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

¶17

Sd/-
Assistant Registrar(CS)
//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
kas
To
The Assistant Executive Engineer
Tamil Nadu Electricity Board
Chennai
+1cc to Mr.V.Ragavachari , Advocate SR.No. 45998
+1cc to Mr.P.R.Dhilip Kumar , Advocate SR.No. 46697
W.P.No.29944 of 2007
and
M.P.No.1 of 2007
vsn (CO)
A.SK(08/07/2019)

¶18

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

Ambikapathy (Deceased) v. the Assistant Executive

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ambikapathy (Deceased) v. the Assistant Executive

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

Gautam H Shah Vs the Senior Accounts Officer

A.Gowrishankar Vs the Collector

Mr.Narendrakumar Lunawath Vs the State of Tamilnadu

T.M.Muruga Gounder, Vs State of Tamil Nadu

T.E.Sadagopan(Deceased) Vs the Collector

J.P. Antony Perumanaygam Vs the Chairman Cum Managing