P.K.Mohan Vs the Chairman

Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records on the file of the 2nd respondent in his proceedings L.No. AE/ O and M/ S.Pattu/ F.Doc/ D.No. 021/ 25- 26 dated 3.05.2025 and quash the same as illegal unlawful and null void and consequently direct the 1st and 2nd respondent to restore the electricity connection issued in the name of Periya gounder in service connection No. 02- 557- 010- 83 and pass

¶22

For Petitioner(s): Mr.S.Venkatesh For Respondent(s): Mr.Swami Subramanian for R1 and R2

¶23

Order

¶24

This Writ Petition is filed challenging the impugned order of the 2^nd respondent, whereby, transferred the electricity connection of the petitioner’s grandfather in favour of the 4^th respondent and consequently direct the 1st and 2nd respondent to restore the electricity connection.

¶25

Case of the petitioner is that the petitioner, his mother and his brother are the joint owners of the lands in S.F.No.2993/A, S.F.No.299/3B1 and S.F.No.299/5A, at Ulagankathan Village, Periya Gounder Thottam, totalling 4.50 acres of land. S.F.No.299/3A was purchased by his grandfather late Periya Gounder and an electricity service connection was issued in his name and after his demise, the petitioner is now operating the electricity connection. While so,

¶26

Page2 of 6

¶27

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

¶28

WP No. 12958 of 2026

¶29

after the death of the petitioner’s father, the 3^rd respondent, who is the petitioner’s aunt, created a fabricated settlement deed dated 10.12.2015, to an extent of 2.00 acres in S.F.No.299/3A. Therefore, the petitioner along with others filed a Suit in O.S.No.234/2017, on the file of the Principal District Munsif Judge, Kallakurichi, to declare the settlement deed executed in favour of the 3^rd respondent as null and void.

¶30

When the suit was pending, the 3^rd respondent illegally sold the abovementioned property to the 4^th respondent. Hence, the petitioner filed another Suit in O.S.No.110 of 2022 to cancel the Sale Deed executed by the 3^rd respondent in favour of the 4^th respondent. While so, the 4^th respondent approached the 2^nd respondent and changed the electricity connection which stood in the name of the petitioner’s grandfather. Immediately, the petitioner gave representation to restore the electricity connection. However, the 2^nd respondent vide impugned order dated 03.05.2025, rejected the petitioner request. Challenging the same, the petitioner is before this Court.

¶31

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that without issuing any notice and conducting enquiry, the 2^nd respondent arbitrarily transferred the electricity connection to the name of the 4^th respondent. Further, the Suits filed by the petitioner are dismissed. Against which, the petitioner filed First Appeals in A.S.Nos.4 and 5 of 2025 before the Subordinate Judge, Kallakurichi. Hence,

¶32

Page3 of 6

¶33

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

¶34

WP No. 12958 of 2026

¶35

this Court may grant liberty to the petitioner to file fresh application, if he succeeds in the First Appeals pending before the Lower Court.

¶36

The learned counsel appearing for the respondents has no objection for such an order being passed by this Court.

¶37

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned counsel appearing for the respondents. Since no adverse orders are passed against the respondents 3 and 4, notice to them is not necessary.

¶38

In view of the limited request made by the learned counsel appearing

¶39

for the petitioner, this Court, without going into the merits of the case, grants liberty to the petitioner to file a fresh application before the respondents 1 and 2, if he succeeds in the First Appeals pending before the Lower Court.

¶40