IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 17-12-2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE N. SATHISH KUMAR

AND

WMP NO. 12211 OF 2017, WMP NO. 12212 OF 2017

S.Mercy Rani

Petitioner(s)

Vs

1. The Assistant Engineer (Sub)

E and PA/Ambattur Circle, Tamilnadu

Electricity Board, Chennai-53

2.The Executive Engineer

O and M/Ambattur, TANGEDCO, 3rd

Main Road, S.S.Campus, Ambattur

Industrial Estate, Chennai - 600 061.

3.The Director(Distribution)

TANGEDCO, NPKRR Maaligai, No.144,

Anna Salai, Chennai - 600 002. 4.The Chairman / The General

Manager, TANGEDCO, NPKRR Maaligai,

No.144, Anna Salai, Chennai - 600 002.

5.Thiru. Ramakrishnan,

The Assistant Engineer (Sub) E and PA / Ambattur Circle, Tamil Nadu Electricity

Board, Chennai - 600 053.

6.C. Ravikumar

Respondent(s)

PRAYER Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records relating to the impugned order in letter No.vu.Po / Am Mai / Ko.Kattu / Ah No.239 dated 27.02.2017 passed by the 1^st respondent and quash the same and consequently direct the 1^st respondent to grant separate electricity connection in the name of the petitioner on the basis of his application dated 27.08.2014 for the property situate in the northern portion of Plot No.178, comprised in Grama Natham Survey No.594 / 1 A2, bearing Door No.37 /14, Shop Street, Venkatapuram, Ambattur, Chennai - 600 053.

For Petitioner(s): Mr.V.Chandrasekaran for Mr. K.Prem Anand For Respondent(s): Mr.L.Jaivenkatesh, Standing Counsel for R1 to R4 Mr.K.A.Mariappan for R6

ORDER

Challenging the order of the 1^st respondent, dated 27.02.2017, rejecting the request of the petitioner to give separate electricity service connection in his name, the present writ petition has been filed.

2.According to the petitioner, his grandparents have purchased the property in Plot No.178 comprised in Grama Natham Survey No.594/1A2, bearing Door No.37/14, Shop Street, Venkatapuram, Ambattur, Chennai, and later, the petitioner’s mother became the owner of the property as settlee. Later, the petitioner became the owner of the property by virtue of settlement deed dated 28.01.2014. Now, the petitioner seeks separate electricity service connection in his name in the property, since it is separated from the other area. However, the same has been rejected by the 1^st respondent by the impugned letter dated 27.02.2017, based on the objections raised by the 6^th respondent.

Challenging the same, the present writ petition has been filed.

3.Initially, this writ petition was allowed by this Court by order dated

14.06.2017 and this Court had directed the respondents to give separate electricity service connection to the petitioner. Now, it is stated that, pursuant to the said order, separate electricity service connection has also been given to the petitioner. Later, after such connection was effected, the 6^th respondent has filed a Review Application in Rev.Aplw.No.33 of 2018 before this Court to review the order of this Court in this writ petition in W.P.No.11289 of 2017, on the ground that he has not been heard in the matter. Therefore, in order to give an opportunity, the said review application was allowed by this Court by order dated 31.10.2025 and accordingly, now, the writ petition has been posted for hearing.

4.Despite several opportunities being given, even now, the 6^th respondent is not ready to argue the matter. However, a counter affidavit has been filed by the 6^th respondent stating that there are several litigations pending between the parties and according to the 6^th respondent, he has put up a shop in the property belonging to him. It is further stated that the sale in favour of the petitioner’s grand parents is not valid and the suit filed by one Kuzhandhai and another in O.S.No.550 of 2013 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Ambattur, also was dismissed for default. It is further stated that the writ petitioner has clandestinely put up a tin shed in the open terrace of his shop premises and th