SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2018 Supreme(SC) 333

A.K.SIKRI, ASHOK BHUSHAN
D. SARAVANAN – Appellant
Versus
SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER TANGEDCO TNEB DISTRIBUTION CIRCLE – Respondent


JUDGMENT

ASHOK BHUSHAN, J.

Leave granted.

2. This appeal has been filed against the Division Bench judgment dated 28.06.2017 of the Madurai Bench of Madras High Court allowing the writ appeal filed by the respondents. The appellant aggrieved by the judgment of the Division Bench has come up in this appeal.

3. The brief facts of the case which are necessary to be noted for deciding this appeal are:

The appellant has submitted an application dated 06.12.2010 praying for grant of Agricultural Electricity Service Connection for use of agricultural equipments with reference to his agricultural land admeasuring 5 acres. The application was returned by the Executive Engineer (Distribution) Rural, Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, with the following observation:

“The application which you sent does not have signature of VAO, Village Administrative Officer and hence the same is returned back.”

4. The appellant after getting defects removed, resubmitted the application on 21.03.2011. No action having been taken by the respondents on the said application writ petition was filed by the appellant in the Madurai Bench of Madras High Court.

5. Learned Single Judge after noticing the case of the appellant dis





























Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top