Disposed

P.Shanmugavel v. the Superintending Engineer

Madras HC31 Aug 2020WP(MD)/7265/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition under Article 226, the petitioner sought disconnection of electricity connections and cancellation of authority records obtained allegedly through fabrication. The court permitted the temple authority (4th respondent) to submit a representation for regularization, directing the other power/corporation authorities to act based on the Board's response within 12 weeks, pending an e

What did the court decide?

Permitted 4th respondent to submit representation; directed 2nd respondent to act after notice to 5th respondent within 12 weeks.

P.Shanmugavel Vs the Superintending Engineer — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2020)

¶1

W.P.(MD)No.7265 of 2020

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 31.08.2020 CORAM

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN W.P.(MD)No.7265 of 2020 and W.M.P.(MD)Nos.6707 and 6709 of 2020

P.Shanmugavel

... Petitioner

Vs.

1.The Superintending Engineer, Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation Ltd.,

¶8

(TANGEDCO), Tirunelveli Circle,

¶9

Tirunelveli, Tirunelveli District.

¶10

2.The Assistant Engineer (Town), TANGEDCO, Shanthi Nagar Divison, Palayamkottai, Tirunelveli District.

¶11

3.The Commissioner, Tirunelveli Corporation, Tirunelveli, Tirunelveli District.

¶12

4.The Executive Officer, Arulmighu Venkatachalapathy Thirukovil, Thimmarasapuram, Palayamkottai Taluk, Tirunelveli District.

¶13

5.P.Sundaram. ... Respondents

¶14

Prayer: Writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents 1 and 2 to disconnect the electricity service connections Nos.SDQ1545, SDQ-1572, SDQ-1557, SDQ-1623 and SDQ-1662 in five shops at Survey No.163, Thimmarasapuram Village, Palayamkottai Taluk, Tirunelveli District having been obtained by the 5^th respondent by means of fraud and fabrication of document and also further direct the 3^rd respondent to cancel the name transfer of metro water connection and tax assessment bearing No.29076 to the said property bearing Survey No.163, Thimmarasapuram Village, Palayamkottai Taluk, Tirunelveli District as from the name of the 5^th respondent to its original position forthwith.

¶15

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Palani Velayutham For Respondents : Mr.S.M.S.Johnny Basha, Standing Counsel for R1 & R2 Mr.Ayiram K.Selvakumar for R3 Mr.H.Arumugam for R4

¶16

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

¶17

1/3

¶18

W.P.(MD)No.7265 of 2020

¶19

O R D E R

¶20

Heard the learned counsel on either side.

¶21

2.The writ petitioner and the fifth respondent are brothers. The petitioner would claim that their father namely.,Pooluthevar though aged 103 years is still healthy and alive. According to him, the property in question belongs to their father. But the fifth respondent is said to have made it appear as if their father is no more and he had obtained electricity connection. The petitioner wants the said connection to be disconnected.

¶22

3.When the matter was taken up for hearing, the learned counsel appearing for the fourth respondent/temple would state that the property on which the premises are standing belongs to the temple and that the petitioner as well as the fifth respondent are rank encroachers. The learned standing counsel for the TANGEDCO would state that following the order dated 27.07.2015 made in W.P.(MD) No.13238 of 2015, the electricity Board took the indemnity bond from the fifth respondent and granted him connection. It is seen that the temple was not heard before the said order was passed.

¶23

4.In fact the temple authorities are ready to regularize the occupants, provide they come forward to become regular tenants of the temple.

¶24

5.In these circumstances, I permit the the fourth respondent herein to submit a representation to the second respondent and the second respondent would take action thereon after putting the fifth respondent on notice. The entire exercise shall be concluded within a period of 12 weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The writ petition is disposed of on these terms. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.

¶25

// True Copy //

¶26

/ /2020 Sub Assistant Registrar(CS)

¶27

ias

¶28

Note : In view of the present lock down owing to COVID-19 pandemic, a web copy of the order may be utilized for official purposes, but, ensuring that the copy of the https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶29

2/3

¶30

W.P.(MD)No.7265 of 2020

¶31

order that is presented is the correct copy, shall be the responsibility of the advocate/litigant concerned. TO

¶32

1.The Superintending Engineer, Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation Ltd., (TANGEDCO), Tirunelveli Circle, Tirunelveli, Tirunelveli District. 2.The Assistant Engineer (Town), TANGEDCO, Shanthi Nagar Divison, Palayamkottai, Tirunelveli District. 3.The Commissioner, Tirunelveli Corporation, Tirunelveli, Tirunelveli District. 4.The Executive Officer, Arulmighu Venkatachalapathy Thirukovil, Thimmarasapuram, Palayamkottai Taluk, Tirunelveli District. KK(10.09.2020) 3 P 5C

¶33

W.P.(MD)No.7265 of 2020

¶34

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

¶35

3/3

P.Shanmugavel v. the Superintending Engineer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

P.Shanmugavel v. the Superintending Engineer

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

M/S.Unicorn Polybags Vs the Customs and Central Excise

C.Angusamy Vs the Commissioner

Hajee T.S.Ahamed Ibrahim Vs the Special Officer

S.T.Mani Vs the Director of Fisheries

P.Deebika Vs the Regional Manager

M.Jagadeesan Vs the Secretary