Disposed

S.Muthusamy v. the Sub Collector

Madras HC14 Aug 2024WP/22906/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition challenging the cancellation of permission for agricultural water connection and directed disconnection of electricity service without notice. Court directed petitioner to file objections and respondents to consider them after providing opportunity, then disposed of the petition.

What did the court decide?

Directions issued to provide opportunity of hearing regarding cancellation of permission and disconnection of service.

S.Muthusamy Vs the Sub Collector — Service and Employment | Madras HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

Dated : 14.08.2024

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI

¶5

W.P.No.22906 of 2024 and WMP.No.24945 of 2024

¶6

S.Muthusamy … Petitioner

¶7

Vs.

¶8

The Sub Collector/ Joint Action Committee Chairman, Tiruppur.

¶9

The Tahsildar, Palladam Taluk.

¶10

The Executive Engineer (O&M) TANGEDCO, Palladam Distribution Circle, Palladam.

¶11

The Executive Engineer,

¶12

Water Resources Department, Parambikulam Azhiyar Division, Pollachi.

¶13

The Assistant Executive Engineer,

¶14

Water Resources Department,

¶15

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶16

¶17

Palladam.

¶18

Parambikulam Azhiyar Sub Division, Palladam. … Respondents

¶19

Prayer: Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for the issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records of the first respondent in his proceedings in Pa.Mu.No.2102/2024/A1 dated 19.06.2024 and quash the same and thereby forbear the 3^rd respondent from disconnecting the agricultural service connection in service connection No.234-005-929 in pursuance of the above impugned order of the first respondent.

¶20

For Petitioner : Mr.N.Suresh

¶21

For Respondents : Mr.L.Jaivenkatesh R3

¶22

Mr.LSM.Hasan Fisal, AGP RR1,2,4 & 4

¶23

O R D E R

¶24

This Writ Petition has been filed seeking to quash the order passed

¶25

by the first respondent in his proceedings in Pa.Mu.No.2102/2024/A1 dated

¶26

19.06.2024 and thereby, forbear the 3^rd respondent from disconnecting the agricultural service connection in service connection No.234-005-929 in pursuance of the above impugned order of the first respondent.

¶27

It is the case of the petitioner that he is the owner of the

¶28

agricultural lands in S.No.36 – 5.49 acres and 47 -2.13 acres at Vavipalayam Village. On the basis of the permission, the petitioner laid

¶29

pipeline and taking water for more than 25 years. On 30.05.2024, the 4^th

¶30

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶31

¶32

respondent has issued order cancelling the permission granted to the petitioner and he was not served any showcause notice and no enquiry was conducted by the 4^th respondent. The Assistant Engineer has issued letter subsequent to the order passed by the 4^th respondent on 12.06.2024 directing the petitioner to remove the pipeline within a period of seven days. Challenging the said order, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition.

¶33

The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that without providing any opportunity, the respondent passed an order and directed to disconnect the electricity service connection which was owned by the petitioner. This Court, without interfering with the impugned order, may directing the respondents to give electricity connection to the petitioner within the stipulated time as fixed by this Court.

¶34

The learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents submitted that the petitioner has been illegally taking water from the well which is situated in the Government Poromboke contrary to the order in W.P.no.10545/2015 dated 19.06.2024. Hence, this Court may dismiss the writ petition.

¶35

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶36

¶37

Heard the learned counsel on either side and perused the materials

¶38

available on record.

¶39

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and in view of the limited request sought for by the petitioner, this court directs the petitioner to make his objection before the 4^th respondents along with a copy of this order within a period two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Upon receipt of such objection, the 4^th shall consider and pass orders on the petitioner's objection after providing opportunity to him within a period of two weeks, thereafter.

¶40

With the above directions, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

¶41

14.08.2024

¶42

¶43

The Sub Collector/

¶44

Joint Action Committee Chairman, Tiruppur.

¶45

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

2. The Tahsildar,

Palladam Taluk.

The Executive Engineer (O&M) TANGEDCO,

¶50

Palladam Distribution Circle, Palladam.

¶51

The Executive Engineer, Water Resources Department, Parambikulam Azhiyar Division, Pollachi.

¶52

The Assistant Executive Engineer, Water Resources Department, Parambikulam Azhiyar Sub Division, Palladam.

¶53

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

M.DHANDAPANI,J.

Rli

W.P.No.22906 of 2024

14.08.2024

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶60

S.Muthusamy v. the Sub Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

S.Muthusamy v. the Sub Collector

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

A.Anbazhagan Vs Union of India

S.Selvakumar, Vs The Executive Engineer

S. Tharageswaran Vs the Commissioner

Sharin Sheela Mary Vs Bharati Axa Life Insurance Company Ltd.

E.Karpagam Vs the Executive Engineer

Manikandan @ Vimal Vs State Rep.by