Madras High Court
The Chairman vs K.Sreenivasa Rao on 10 July, 2023
W.A.No.2107 of 2018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 10.07.2023
CORAM :
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.KRISHNAKUMAR
and
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P. B.BALAJI
W.A.No.2107 of 2018 and
CMP No.16537 of 2018
1. The Chairman,
Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, No.800,
Anna Salai, Chennai 600 002.
2. The Superintending Engineer,
Tamil Nadu electricity Board,
Anna Salai, K.K.Nagar, Chennai-78.
3. The Assistant Engineer (Operation and
Maintenance), Tamil Nadu Electricity Board,
K.K.Nagar, Chennai 600 078. ... Appellants
Vs.
1. K.Sreenivasa Rao,
No.38-C, R.K.Shanmugam Salai,
K.K.Nagar, Chennai 600 078.
2. The Member Secretary,
Chennai Metropolitan Development Authority,
No.1, Gandhi Irwyn Road,
Egmore, Chennai 600 008. ...
Page 1 of 8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.No.2107 of 2018
Respondents
Prayer: Writ Appeal filed under Section 15 of Letters Patent to set aside the
order passed by this Court in W.P.No.6098 of 2010 dated 17.06.2014.
For Appellant : Mr.L.Jaivenkatesh, Standing Counsel
For Respondents : No appearance
JUDGEMENT
(Judgment of the Court was delivered by D.KRISHNAKUMAR, J.)
This Intra Court Appeal has been filed, challenging the order passed
by this Court in W.P.No.11968/2014 dated 02.07.2014 by the Tamil Nadu
Electricity Board.
2. Despite service of the notice and names have been printed in cause
list, none appeared for the respondents.
3. The brief facts leading to file the present appeal is as follows.
The first respondent herein filed the writ petition stating that he has
constructed stilt + 4 floors of residential building with 8 dwelling units of
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.No.2107 of 2018
residential building at Block No.76, P.T.Rajan Salai, K.K.Nagar, Chennai
600078, after obtaining sanction from the CMDA However there were some
small deviations and it can be rectified. When the first respondent
approached the Board seeking electricity service connection, they insisted to
produce completion certificate/no objection certificate from the CMDA.
Since the electricity supply is a basic amenity to the occupants, without
insisting on completion certificate, the Board has to give service connection
and hence he has filed the above said writ petition. This Court, vide order
dated 02.07.2014 has directed the Board to effect electricity service
connection to the first respondent/ writ petitioner, without insisting upon the
completion certificate. Challenging the above order passed by the Writ
Court, this intra court appeal has been filed by the Board.
4. The learned standing counsel appearing for the appellants
submitted that, the claim of the petitioner to provide electricity supply,
without insisting completion certificate/ NOC from the CMDA is against the
statutory provisions contained in Tamil Nadu Electricity Distribution Code,
2004, requiring order compliances under regulation 27(1) read with
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.No.2107 of 2018
explanation after regulation 27(16) of the said Court and therefore, the order
of the Writ Court is against the said statutory provisions. To support his
contention, he has relied upon a decision of the First Bench of this Court in
W.P.No.15344 of 2020 dated 17.03.2021 (Coimbatore Consumer Cause
(Regd.No.110/97) Vs. The Chairman and Managing Director,
TANGEDCO and others).
5. Heard the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the appellants
and also we have perused the materials on records.
6. It is an admitted fact that the first respondent herein had
constructed Stilt + 4 floor with 8 dwelling units of residential building after
obtaining sanction from the CMDA. But, without producing completion
certificate, the first respondent herein had sought electricity connection and
while the Board insisting upon the completion certificate, he filed the writ
petition and obtained order in favour of him, to effect the electricity
connection by the Board, without insisting upon the completion certificate.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.No.2107 of 2018
7. At this juncture, it is relevant to note that in the reliance placed by
the learned standing counsel appearing for the appellant in W.P.No.15344
of 2020 dated 17.03.2021 as stated supra, the Hon'ble First Bench of this
Court has observed as follows.
9. Upon perusal of the draft scheme, it is evident that the draft scheme
is applicable with regard to the provisions of Low Tension electricity
supply connections for buildings other than high-rise buildings as
defined in Rule2(58) of the 2019 Rules. The 2019 Rules provide that
a completion certificate is required for all the buildings, except
residential buildings upto 12 metres in height nt exceeding three
dwelling units or 750 square metre and all type of industrial buildings.
Thus, it appears that the draft scheme is contrary to Rule 20 of the
2019 rules which apply to all buildings, except residential buildings
upto 12 metres, whereas, the draft scheme is made applicable to all
buildings other than high-rise buildings, i.e. buildings which do not
exceed 18.30 metres. It is needless to say that the TANGEDCO
cannot provide for the Low Tension Supply connection in
contravention of applicable rules such as the 2019 Rules.
10. Thus, the objections of the writ petitioner herein to the impugned
memorandum and the draft scheme would be sustantially addressed
provided the TANGEDCO adheres strictly to the 2019 Rules while
providing Low Tension electricity supply connection to the classes of
consumers indicated in the draft scheme.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.No.2107 of 2018
11. Accordingly, W.P.15344 of 2020 is disposed of by directing the
TANGEDCO to comply strictly with the Tamil Nadu Combined
Development Rules, 2019 with regard to the grant of all electricity
service connections.
8. Here in this case, admittedly, the first respondent had constructed
Stilt + 4 floor with 8 dwelling units of residential buildings. Therefore, in
the light of the above decision of the Hon'ble First Bench of this Court, to
extent the service connection, insisting upon the completion certificate from
CMDA is necessary and hence, we are of the view that the order passed by
the Writ Court warrants interference by this Court.
9. Accordingly the Writ Appeal is allowed and the order passed by the
Writ Court in W.P.No.11968/2014 dated 04.08.2014 is set aside.
Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
(D.K.K.J.) (P.B.B.J.)
10.07.2023
Internet: Yes/No
Index : Yes/No
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.No.2107 of 2018
mst
To
The Member Secretary,
Chennai Metropolitan Development Authority,
No.1, Gandhi Irwyn Road,
Egmore, Chennai 600 008.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.No.2107 of 2018
D.KRISHNAKUMAR, J.
and
P. B.BALAJI, J.
mst
W.A.No.2107 of 2018
10.07.2023
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
