M.Dhasthaheer Vs the Superintending Engineer — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2025)

M.Dhasthaheer Vs the Superintending Engineer — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

No relief on merits; writ petition disposed of as infructuous with parties directed to abide by the result of O.S.No.103 of 2013 and liberty to approach the authorities thereafter; civil court to decide independently and uninfluenced; no costs; connected miscellaneous petitions closed.

Issue for consideration

Whether the impugned order dated 20.01.2018 granting electricity service connection to the private respondent, passed without a personal hearing and without disclosing consideration of documents of title or proof of occupancy, should be quashed. +1 more

Court's answer

Despite the earlier direction dated 23.11.2017, no personal hearing was granted to all concerned before passing the impugned order.

Ratio / Principle

As no construction exists in the property and the electricity service connection stands disconnected, the writ petition has become infructuous.

Key takeaways

The impugned order is non-speaking and does not disclose whether documents of title or proof of occupancy required under the Tamil Nadu Electricity Distribution Code were produced.obiter¶25
The parties shall abide by the result of O.S.No.103 of 2013 (District Munsif Court, Pattukottai) and are at liberty to approach the authorities thereafter; the civil court shall decide the suit independently and uninfluenced by any observations in this order.ratio¶32

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Madras High Court, Madurai Bench (P.T. Asha J.) disposed of a writ petition under Article 226 seeking certiorari against the Assistant Engineer, TANGEDCO, Nadiyam's order dated 20.01.2018 granting an electricity service connection to the fourth respondent. The Court noted that an earlier order dated 23.11.2017 in W.P.(MD)No.18963 of 2017 had required production of title documents and a personal hearing, but no hearing was held and the impugned order was non-speaking and silent on proof of title or occupancy under the Tamil Nadu Electricity Distribution Code. However, since it was placed on record that no construction exists on the property (which is the subject matter of O.S.No.103 of 2013 before the District Munsif Court, Pattukottai) and the service connection stands disconnected, the writ petition had become infructuous and was disposed of accordingly. The parties were directed to abide by the result of the civil suit, with liberty to approach the authorities thereafter; the civil court was to decide the suit independently and uninfluenced by the observations herein. No costs; connected miscellaneous petitions closed.

W.P(MD)No.5053 of 2018

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

DATED: 29.10.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE P.T.ASHA

Writ Petition(MD)No.5053 of 2018 and W.M.P(MD)Nos.5020 & 5127 of 2018

M.Dhasthaheer

..Petitioner

Vs

1.The Superintending Engineer, TANGEDCO, Thanjavur District, Thanjavur.

2.The Executive Engineer, O & M, TANGEDCO, Pattukottai, Thanjavur District.

3.The Assistant Engineer, O @ M, TANGEDCO, Nadiyam-614802. Thanjavur District.

4.Sahitha Beevi

..Respondents

Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Certiorari to call for the records relating to the impugned order of the third respondent dated 20.01.2018 in Lr.No.A.E.O&M/Nadiyam (D.Thara)/A.No.61/17-18 and quash the same.

1/5

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

W.P(MD)No.5053 of 2018

For Petitioner : Mr.N.Dilipkumar

For Respondents : Mr.M.Viji for Mr.K.Nagarajan

Standing Counsel for R1 to R3

Mrs.V.Sundari for R4

ORDER

The petitioner challenges the order of the third respondent dated 20.01.2018 granting electricity service connection to the private respondent. The suit property is already the subject matter of O.S.No.103 of 2013, on the file of the District Munsif Court, Pattukottai, in which the petitioner seeks declaration of title and injunction. The petitioner has also filed an application to implead the Electricity Board in the said suit.

Earlier, the private respondent filed W.P.(MD)No.18963 of 2017. By order dated 23.11.2017, this Court directed her to produce documents of title and possession and further directed the Electricity Board to afford a personal hearing to all concerned before taking a decision. However, no such hearing was granted before passing the impugned order. The impugned order is non-speaking and does not disclose whether documents of title or proof of occupancy, as required under the Tamil Nadu Electricity Distribution Code, were produced.

2/5

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

W.P(MD)No.5053 of 2018

The petitioner contends that the private respondent sought the

service connection only to create evidence of possession in the pending civil suit.

It is now placed on record that no construction exists in the property and the electricity service connection stands disconnected. Since there is no existing building and no active service connection, the writ petition has become infructuous.

Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of. The parties shall abide by the result of O.S.No.103 of 2013 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Pattukottai, and are at liberty to approach the authorities thereafter. The civil court shall decide the suit independently and uninfluenced by any observations contained herein. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.

29.10.2025

NCC : Yes/No Index : Yes/No Internet:Yes skn

3/5

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

W.P(MD)No.5053 of 2018

To

1.The Superintending Engineer, TANGEDCO, Thanjavur District, Thanjavur.

2.The Executive Engineer, O & M, TANGEDCO, Pattukottai, Thanjavur District.

3.The Assistant Engineer, O @ M, TANGEDCO, Nadiyam-614802. Thanjavur District.

4/5

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

W.P(MD)No.5053 of 2018

P.T.ASHA, J.

skn

Writ Petition(MD)No.5053 of 2018 and W.M.P(MD)Nos.5020 & 5127 of 2018

29.10.2025

5/5

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