Back
2009 Supreme(Mad) 2220
High Court of Judicature at Madras
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAJESWARAN
R. Paneer Selvam
Versus
The Superintending Engineer & Another
W.P.No.12642 of 2009 and M.P.No.1 of 2009
Decided on: 09-07-2009
For the Petitioner:M. Hidayathulla Khan, Advocate. For the Respondents:J. Ravindran, Advocate.
The right to get electricity service connection is a part of the fundamental rights guaranteed under Article 21 of the constitution of India.
Headnote:
Electricity Service Connection - Fundamental Rights - The court held that the denial of electricity service connection to the petitioner cannot be accepted, as the right to get electricity service connection is virtually a part of the fundamental rights guaranteed under Article 21 of the constitution of India.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, owner of a land, applied for electricity service connection which was denied by the respondent. The petitioner filed a writ petition seeking the electricity service connection.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that there was no civil dispute between the parties and that the denial of the electricity service connection was not acceptable as it is a part of the fundamental rights guaranteed under Article 21 of the constitution of India.
Issues: The issue was whether the petitioner was entitled to the electricity service connection and if the denial of the service connection was justified.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the right to get electricity service connection is virtually a part of the fundamental rights guaranteed under Article 21 of the constitution of India, and therefore, the petitioner was entitled to the electricity service connection.
Final Decision: The writ petition was allowed, and the respondents were directed to extend the service connection to the petitioner's premises within a period of one month.
The case of the petitioner is as follows:
Petitioner is the owner of the land in S.No.172/1 situated at Kalappanaickenpatti village, Senthamangalam having purchased the same and registered sale deed dated 16.07.2001. Since then he has been in possession of the property. Patta has also been transferred by the Revenue Authorities in his favour. His name has also been entered into revenue records namely chitta and adangal. He has constructed a house in the land and in order to get electricity service connection, he applied to Tamilnadu Electricity Board the 2nd respondent. The 2nd respondent returned his application by letter dated 17.04.2009 holding that there was an objection raised by Nalantha, Indira and others and writ petition No.6192/2006 is pending in respect of extending new service connection to the petitioner. Thereafter the petitioner made a detailed representation to the respondents enclosing the copy of the order and also gave necessary documents in support of his case but no action has been taken. Hence the petitioner has filed the above writ petition for the above said prayer.
2. This writ petition is being disposed of at the admission stage itself with the consent of both the learned counsel appearing on either side.
3. I have heard the learned counsel on either side and gone through the documents available on record.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner has put up a small building in his own land and applied for electricity service connection. There is no civil dispute between them and the one which was there has also ended in favour of the petitioner. W.P.No.6192 of 2006 referred for by the respondent Board is already disposed of. If that be so, he adds that there is no impediment for extending the electricity service connection to him.
5. I find force in the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner. When the petitioner has applied to the respondents for service connection and the same was denied. In my considered opinion the denial on the part of the respondent board to extend the service connection to the petitioner cannot be accepted, as right to get electricity service connection is virtually a part of the fundamental rights guaranteed under Article 21 of the constitution of India, since this is very intimately connected with the right to life in the present day situation. Therefore the writ petitioner is entitled to get the electricity service connection.
6. In the result, writ petition is allowed, consequently the respondents are directed to extend service connection to the petitioners premises within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of the order on the petitioner producing the documents satisfying the respondent board. No costs. Connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
