Disposed

R.Suresh, S/O.Ramasamy v. the Superintending Engineer

Madras HC12 Nov 2024WP(MD)/16353/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madurai bench of the Madras High Court disposed of a writ petition regarding a dispute over electricity service connections. The Court directed respondents to expediently consider the petitioner's application dated 11.12.2014 for a free service connection when the department announces the next round.

What did the court decide?

The petitioner's application dated 11.12.2014 for a free service connection be considered and orders passed as expeditiously as possible.

R.Suresh, S/O.Ramasamy Vs the Superintending Engineer — Service and Employment | Madras HC (2024)

¶1

W.P.(MD)No.16353 of 2015

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 12.11.2024

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.KUMARESH BABU

¶6

W.P.(MD)No.16353 of 2015 and

¶7

W.M.P.(MD)No.8931 of 2016

¶8

R.Suresh ...Petitioner

¶9

¶10

1.The Superintending Engineer, Karur Electricity Distribution Circle, TANGEDCO,

¶11

Trichy Karur Road,

¶12

Karur.

¶13

2.The Assistant Administrative Officer /

¶14

Executive Engineer, Karur Electricity Distribution Circle (Rural), TANGEDCO,

¶15

Karur.

¶16

3.The Assistant Executive Engineer, TANGEDCO, Pugalur Kakithapuram, Karur District.

¶17

4.The Assistant Engineer, TANGEDCO, Noyyal,

¶18

Karur District.

¶19

5.Vijayalakshmi

¶20

6.Kalanidhi

¶21

1/6

¶22

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 1/6

¶23

W.P.(MD)No.16353 of 2015

... Respondents

7.Surya

8.Poongothai

Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents 1 to 4 to provide the service connection No.151 to the petitioner's agricultural fields comprised in Survey No.364/1 situated at Vetamangalam Village, ManMangalam Taluk, Karur District, by disconnecting the said service connection from the field of the respondents 5 to 8 comprised in Survey No.361 at Vetamangalam Village, ManMangalam Taluk, Karur within the time stipulated by this Court.

¶28

For Petitioner : Mr.A.Robinson

¶29

For R-1 to R-4 : Mr.S.Deenadhayalan Standing Counsel For R-5 to R-8 : Mr.V.Meenakshi Sundaram

¶30

O R D E R

¶31

Heard Mr.A.Robinson, learned counsel for the petitioner,

¶32

Mr.S.Deenadhayalan , learned Standing Counsel for respondents 1 to 4 and Mr.V.Meenakshi Sundaram, learned counsel for respondents 5 to 8.

¶33

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 2/6

¶34

W.P.(MD)No.16353 of 2015

¶35

This Writ Petition has been filed praying for a Mandamus, directing the respondents 1 to 4 to provide the service connection to the petitioner's agricultural fields comprised in Survey No.364/1 situated at Vetamangalam Village, ManMangalam Taluk, Karur District, by disconnecting the said service connection from the field of the respondents 5 to 8 comprised in Survey No.361 at Vetamangalam Village, ManMangalam Taluk, Karur.

¶36

The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner's father Ramasamay had made an application for grant of service connection as early as in the year 1979. However, the respondent authorities had wrongly granted service connection in the name of another Ramasamay who is the husband of the eighth respondent and hence, the legal heirs of the Ramasamy viz., respondents 5 to 8 claim title over the property.

¶37

The learned Standing Counsel for the respondents 1 to 4 would submit that the records relating to the grant of service connection in the year 1979 is not available with the Department. However, he would further submit that the petitioner himself had made an application for

¶38

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 3/6

¶39

W.P.(MD)No.16353 of 2015

¶40

grant of free service connection in the year 2014 and that the free service connection till 31.03.2013 had been sanctioned and during the next announcement, the claim of the petitioner would be automatically considered and service connection would be granted, if his application is otherwise in order.

¶41

Recording the said submission, this Writ Petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents 1 to 4, to consider the application of the petitioner dated 11.12.2014, by taking into consideration the further representation of the petitioner dated 02.01.2015 and pass orders, as expeditiously as possible, as and when the announcement is made by the Department for grant of free service connection. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

¶42

12.11.2024

¶43

NCC:yes/no Index:yes/no Internet:yes/no Nsr

¶44

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 4/6

¶45

W.P.(MD)No.16353 of 2015

¶46

To:

¶47

1.The Superintending Engineer, Karur Electricity Distribution Circle, TANGEDCO, Trichy Karur Road, Karur.

¶48

2.The Assistant Administrative Officer / Executive Engineer, Karur Electricity Distribution Circle (Rural), TANGEDCO,

¶49

Karur.

¶50

3.The Assistant Executive Engineer, TANGEDCO, Pugalur Kakithapuram, Karur District.

¶51

4.The Assistant Engineer, TANGEDCO, Noyyal, Karur District.

¶52

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 5/6

¶53

W.P.(MD)No.16353 of 2015

¶54

K.KUMARESH BABU, J.

¶55

Nsr

¶56

W.P.(MD)No.16353 of 2015

¶57

12.11.2024

¶58

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 6/6

R.Suresh, S/O.Ramasamy v. the Superintending Engineer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

R.Suresh, S/O.Ramasamy 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

S.P.Murthy, Vs the District Collector

Santhana Muthiah.R Vs The State of Tamil Nadu

M/s.Thirumagal Dyeing Works Vs Joint Commissioner Of Gst And Central Excise

Haji.a.G.Syed Mohideen Vs The Tamil Nadu Waqf Board

M. Palgees Amma Vs the Superintendent of Engineer

Seeman, S/O.Ramasamy Pillai, Vs the Superintending Engineer