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

2025 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 9409

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Honourable Mr Justice M.DHANDAPANI
S.MUTHUSAMY – Appellant
Versus
THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER – Respondent



IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 04.11.2025 CORAM :

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M. DHANDAPANI and W.M.P.No.30386 of 2023 S.Muthusamy ... Petitioner Vs.

1.The Executive Engineer, Parambikulam Aliyar Project Water Resources Division, Thirumurthi Basin Division, Udumalpet, Tiruppur District.

2.The Executive Engineer, Operation & Maintenance, TANGEDCO, Udumalpet Electricity Distribution Circle, Udumalpet.

3.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Chairman of Joint Superintending Committee, PAP Scheme, Udumalpet Division. ... Respondents Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records of the third respondent in Na.Ka.No.1206/2022/A1 dated 30.11.2022, quash the same and consequently direct the respondents to restore the application for fresh connection in EEU/360/2002-03 dated 06.11.2002 and provide agricultural service connection to well of the petitioner in S.No.44/3D, Thanthoni Village, Udumalpet Taluk, Tiruppur District, for the well of the petitioner situated near the Canal.

For Petitioner : Mr.P.Srinivas For Respondents : Mrs.S.Anitha Special Government Pleader [R1 & R3]

Mr.L.Jai Venkatesh Standing Counsel [R2]

*****

ORDER

This Writ Petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking for a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records of the 3rd respondent in Na.Ka.No.1206/2022/A1 dated 30.11.2022, quash the same and consequently, to direct the respondents to restore the application for fresh connection in EEU/360/2002-03 dated 06.11.2002 and provide agricultural service connection to well of the petitioner in S.No.44/3D, Thanthoni Village, Udumalpet Taluk, Tiruppur District, for the well of the petitioner situated near the Canal.

2. The case of the petitioner is that he is the owner of the lands in S.Nos.44/3D (77 Ares or 2 Acres) and 47/1 (12 ares or 30 cents) in Thungavi Village. The said lands are in a contiguous parcel and are prime agricultural lands. The lands are classified as Punja Lands and there are two agriculatural wells in the S.No.44/3D for the irrigaiton of the said lands. The lands are adjoining the Udumalpet Branch Canal 2 of the Parambikulam Aliyar Project that carries water for the irrigation of the ayacut lands that are downstream of the petitioner’s lands. Both the borewell were digged prior to 1967. In the year 1980, the petitioner obtained the agricultural service connection No.317 from the Ayyampalayam Pudur Electricity Distribution Circle. The said two wells are about 300 feet apart and the wells are having good yield of water for agricultural purposes. The lands are having coconut trees and that are about 20 years old and the petitioner was using the water drawn from the well that is far away from the PAP canal. Both the wells are more than 60 years old and prior to the PAP project. The petitioner has also obtained NOC from the respondents in the year 2003 for using a changeover switch for installing another pump in the well that is nearer to the PAP canal and the said NOC was given by the 1st respondent on 31.12.2003. However, the 3rd respondent passed the impugned order stating that the petitioner’s well is situated within the prohibited distance i.e., 50 meters and both the wells are situated within 5 meters, thereby ordered for disconnecting the electricity service connection. Challenging the same, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition before this Court.

3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that, without providing any opportunity to the petitioner, the present impugned order is passed and the same is contrary to the decision rendered by this Court in W.P.No.3181 of 2017, etc. batch. Accordingly, he prays for appropriate orders.

4. Learned counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent submitted that based on the orders passed by this Court in W.P.Nos.10545 of 2018, 957 of 2016 and 3181 of 2017, etc. Batch, and G.O.Ms.No.2261 (PWD), dated 03.11.1967, the

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
whatsapp-icon Back to top