The main legal point established in the judgment is the distribution licensee's duty to provide electricity supply to an intending consumer within a specified period, and the obligation of the intending consumer to arrange for necessary way leave, license, or sanction before the supply is effected, as per the Electricity Act, 2003 and the Tamilnadu Electricity Distribution Code 2004.

1. The petitioner, who has constructed a house in Pappini Village, Kangeyam Taluk and assigned Door No.2/181 by the Pappini Panchayat Union, and assessed property tax, has made an application on 24.03.2012 for electricity service connection. After scrutinizing the application, the Assistant Engineer, Operation & Maintenance, TANGEDCO, Muthur, Tiruppur District, the 1st respondent vide letter dated 11.05.2012, has directed the petitioner to pay a sum of Rs.28,780/-. The said sum has been paid on 19.05.2012. Pursuant to the same, the 1st respondent has started the work to provide service connection. When they were about to carry out the lines through the posts, the Assistant Engineer, Operation & Maintenance, TANGEDCO, Muthur, Tiruppur District, the 1st respondent herein, vide letter dated 06.10.2012 has informed the petitioner that, one Minor @ T.Palanisamy, the President of Pappini Panchayat Union, the 2nd respondent herein has raised objections for erection of the posts, in front of Periyanayagi Amman Temple. He has also stated that erection of posts and electricity supply would cause hindrance, while constructing a mandapam. Alongwith the communication dated 06.10.2012, the Assistant Engineer, Operation & Maintenance, TANGEDCO, Muthur, Tiruppur District, has also enclosed a copy of the objections submitted by the Panchayat Union. According to the petitioner, the objections are made out of personal enmity.

2. The Executive Officer, Arulmighu Periyanayagiamman Thirukoil, Pappini, P.pachapalayam Post, Kangeyam Taluk, Tiruppur District, the 3rd respondent has also made similar objections. On receipt of the same, the Assistant Engineer, Operation & Maintenance, TANGEDCO, Muthur, Tiruppur District, the 1st respondent herein has not taken any steps to effect service connection, but has blamed the petitioner, stating that he has not provided any alternate way.

3. The petitioner has further submitted that as per Section 43 of the Electricity Act, 2003, he is entitled to seek for electricity service connection, to his residential house. As electricity, is an indispensable need to live, deprivation of the same would amount to violation of Article 21 of the Constitution of India.

4. In the abovesaid circumstances, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition for a writ of certiorarified mandamus, calling for the records relating to the impugned proceedings passed in U.Mi.Po/O&M/WMuthur/No.247 dated 05.01.2013 on the file of the 1st respondent herein, quash the same and consequently direct the respondents herein, to grant Electricity Service Connection to the petitioner's house at Door No.2/181, Koolikadu, P.Pachapalayam Post, Pappini, Kangeyam Taluk, Tiruppur District.

5. In support of the above pleadings, as regards, the direction, to pay the estimated amount and additional costs, location of the posts erected, Mr.K.Govi Ganesan, learned counsel for the petitioner took this Court through the proceedings dated 06.10.2012, 17.10.2012, 20.11.2012, 20.12.2012 and 05.01.2013, respectively.

6. In addition to the above, taking this Court through the photographs enclosed at paragraph No.45 of the typed set of papers, he further added that electric posts, have been erected on the edge of the lands belonging to the 3rd respondent temple and that wires have been drawn from the power point of the licencee and to the place in between the lands belonging to the temple and that of the petitioners.

7. Referring to Regulation 29 of the Tamilnadu Electricity Distribution Code 2004, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the 3rd respondent, an existing consumer, is bound to provide way leave for connecting other consumers or intending consumers. According to him, when electricity is the need of the hour for survival, education and all other developmental activities, the petitioner being a poor lady cannot be deprived of electricity service connection, on the objections of the respondents 2 and 3.

8. The 2nd respondent has been