Madras High Court
V.Isaac vs The Assistant Engineer ... on 5 August, 2021
W.P.No.16285 of 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 05.08.2021
CORAM :
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.ANAND VENKATESH
W.P.No.16285 of 2021
V.Isaac ... Petitioner
-Vs-
The Assistant Engineer (Pallavaram West)
Tamil Nadu Generation & Distribution
Corporation Ltd (TANGEDCO)
Pallavaram, Chennai – 600 043. ... Respondents
Prayer : Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance
of a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondent to forthwith give Electricity Service
Connection to the petitioner's house bearing Door No.3, Cantonment Quarters, Cantonment
Pallavaram, Chennai-43 based on the application of the petitioner dated 01.05.2021.
For Petitioner : Mr.K.Selvaraj
For Respondents : Mr.J.Venkatesh, Standing Counsel
ORDER
This Writ Petition has been filed for issuing a Writ of Mandamus directing the
respondent to provide electricity service connection to the house of the petitioner.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P.No.16285 of 2021
2.The case of the petitioner is that he and his family members are residing in a hut at
Pallavaram, Chennai. The further case of the petitioner is that he submitted an application
on 01.05.2021 to the respondent along with all the documents in order to prove their
possession. The petitioner also submitted an indemnity bond to the respondent. The
further case of the petitioner is that several persons, who are similarly placed in the same
area have been given temporary electricity connection. Therefore, the petitioner also wants
to be given the same treatment and the petitioner has sought for temporary electricity
connection.
3. The respondent has filed a counter affidavit. The relevant portion in the
counter affidavit is extracted hereunder
“ ?6. I further submit that the electricity is given to one J.
Ruben at Door No.5, Cantonment on 02.07.1996, on the basis of
his application dated 04.05.1996 submitted along with the NOC
from Cantonment Executive Officer, St. Thomas Mount, Pallavaram
and while so the amended provisions of Clause 27(12) was not in
force and the Clause 27(12) of the said code come into force only
on 21.6.2006 and the service connection to Mr. Chinnayogaiyya at
Door No.20, Cantonment is also effected on 27.12.2000 (i.e.)
which is also prior to the amendment made to Clause 27(12).
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P.No.16285 of 2021
7. I further submit that with regard to Mr. P. Konddaiya at
Door No.18, Cantonment the electricity supply is effect on
03.08.2011 without knowing the amendment in Clause 27(12) of
the T.N. Electricity is effected and thereafter from 03.08.2011,
there was no such electricity supply effected till date as the
Cantonment Tahsil instructing the TANGEDCO that no such
electricity supply shall be effected without the production of the No
objection certificate (NOC) from the Cantonment Tahsildar, as this
lands are Government Promboke land and falls within the territory
of the cantonment and defence area and hence the electricity
service request was not considered due to the regular follow up
from the Cantonment Tahsildar and also under the circumstances
that none of the writ petitioners had produced the NOC from the
Cantonment Tahsildar as contemplated under Clause 27(12) of the
said code and hence the Writ Petitioners are not entitled to get the
electricity supply to their recent huts occupation without the
production of NOC from the said Cantonment Tahsildar being a
mandatory requirement under the said code.?
4.Mr.K.Selvaraj, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that
the land in question is a poramboke land and as per the Electricity Distribution Code, either
the petitioner will have to obtain No Objection Certificate from the concerned authority or the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P.No.16285 of 2021
petitioner will have to give an undertaking as contemplated in clause 27 (12) of the
Distribution Code. Learned counsel further submitted that the respondent in the counter
have accepted the fact that three other persons have been given electricity connection and
therefore, the petitioner must also be treated in par with them and the petitioner is willing to
give the undertaking by way of submitting an indemnity bond.
5. Learned counsel further brought to the notice of this Court the award that was
passed in the Lok Adalat held on 14.07.2018, wherein a similar request made by one
Mariammal was accepted by the Electricity Board, based on the indemnity bond executed by
her. The learned counsel also placed reliance upon a judgment in (T.M.Prakash ..vs.. The
District Collector, Tiruvannamalai District) reported in 2013 (6) CTC 849 to substantiate his
submission that even those persons, who are in occupation of the poramboke land are
entitled to electricity connection under the Tamil Nadu Electricity Distribution Code, 2004.
6. Per contra, Mr.J.Venkatesh, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent
submitted that the Cantonment is raising an objection for providing electricity connection to
the petitioner and therefore, the petitioner can very well get a No Objection Certificate from
the Cantonment and submit it to the respondent and thereafter, the respondent will provide
electricity connection to the petitioner. The learned counsel further submitted that there is
absolutely no material to show that the hut, in which the petitioner and his family members
are in occupation, is assessed for property tax. The learned counsel further submitted that
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P.No.16285 of 2021
without any assessment of property tax,the respondent will not be able to provide electricity
connection. The learned counsel heavily relied upon paragraphs 6 and 7 of the counter
affidavit filed by the respondent.
7.In reply to the said submissions, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that
the property will not be assessed for property tax when it is situated in a poramboke land.
The learned counsel submitted that there are sufficient documents to show that the
petitioner and his family members have been in occupation of the hut from the year 1980
onwards.
8. This Court has carefully considered the submissions made on either side and
perused the materials available on record.
9.There is no dispute with regard to the fact that the petitioner is in occupation of the
poramboke land and the petitioner has constructed a hut and he is in possession of the same
along with his family members. Be that as the case may, the petitioner wants to be treated
on par with three other persons who have been given temporary electricity connection and
who are living near the place in which the petitioner has put up a hut.
10.It is seen that the three persons, who are given electricity connection have also
been acknowledged in the counter affidavit filed by the respondent. Similarly, it is seen that
one more person, named Mariammal was also given temporary electricity connection by
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P.No.16285 of 2021
virtue of an award passed in the Lok Adalat in the year 2018. The said Mariammal has also
executed an indemnity bond before she was provided with the electricity connection.
11. This Court has recognized the right of an encroacher to receive electricity
connection in the judgment that was cited by the learned counsel for the petitioner.
Therefore, this Court does not want to once again go into the same issue with regard to the
entitlement of an encroacher to get electricity connection.
12. The only other issue that has to be considered is whether the petitioner will have
to get a No Objection Certificate from the authority before being considered for giving
electricity connection. A careful reading of clause 27 (12) of the Tamil Nadu Electricity
Distribution Code shows that insofar as a poramboke land is concerned either No Objection
Certificate must be obtained from the concerned authority or an undertaking affidavit must
be furnished as provided in the said clause.
13. In the facts of the present case, there are atleast four electricity connections given
in favour of persons, who are on the same footing like that of the petitioner. Therefore, the
petitioner cannot be treated differently. Therefore, if the petitioner establishes the
possession over the property, the respondent will have to consider the application submitted
by the petitioner and get an indemnity bond and also an undertaking as contemplated under
clause 27 (12) of the Tamil Nadu Electricity Distribution Code. Once that is done, the
temporary electricity connection can be given to the petitioner.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P.No.16285 of 2021
14.The petitioner is directed to give a fresh application to the respondent and the
respondent shall consider the same in line with the findings given in the present Writ Petition
and get the necessary indemnity bond and undertaking from the petitioner and provide for
temporary electricity connection. This process shall be done within a period of four weeks
from the date of receipt of the application from the petitioner.
15. This Writ Petition is disposed of with the above direction. No costs.
05.08.2021
Index : Yes/No
Internet : Yes/No
KST
To
The Assistant Engineer (Pallavaram West)
Tamil Nadu Generation & Distribution
Corporation Ltd (TANGEDCO)
Pallavaram, Chennai – 600 043.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P.No.16285 of 2021
N.ANAND VENKATESH, J.
kst
W.P.No.16285 of 2021
05.08.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
