An administrative authority cannot reject a request for service connection transfer based on a legal opinion if a court has already directed the authority to consider and act upon that request based on specific documents.

Prayer:

This Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records pertaining to the impugned order of Ka.No.Ka.Mi.Po./2Mi.Ni./Ve./Ko; Va.No.302/2014 dated 23.05.2014 passed by the third respondent and quash the same and consequently directing the respondents 1, 2 and 3 to change the name of the electricity connection of S.C.No.84 into the petitioner's name.

ORDER

The present writ petition has been filed seeking to quash the order passed by the third respondent wherein the request of the petitioner for transfer of electricity service connection in her name from the name of the fourth respondent has been rejected on the basis of legal opinion given by the Government Advocate on 19.05.2014.

The writ petitioner herein as plaintiff had initiated O.S.No.282 of 2004 before the District Munsif Court, Sivakasi seeking a declaration that the notice issued by the Assistant Electricity Engineer, TNEB, Satchiyapuram, is not legally valid. The suit came to be dismissed by the trial Court. The petitioner has preferred A.S.No.47 of 2011 before the Subordinate Court, Sivakasi. The appeal was also dismissed. Challenging the same, the writ petitioner along with one Anusuya have filed S.A(MD).No.109 of 2013. The said second appeal was dismissed and an observation was made that the plaintiff in the suit could approach the electricity board authority for transfer of service connection in their name. Paragraph No.20 of the said judgment is extracted as follows:

“20.In fine, this second appeal deserves dismissal and accordingly is dismissed without costs at the stage of admission and the concurrent judgments and decrees passed by the Courts below are confirmed. However, the plaintiffs are directed to give an application to the second defendant with a copy of the partition deed dated 07.10.1973 so as to change service connection in their names. The second defendant is directed to act as per the requisition to be given by the plaintiffs as well as the recitals found in the partition deed dated 07.10.1973.”

Relying upon the second appeal judgement, the petitioner has approached the third respondent for transfer of service connection. However, based upon the legal opinion, the request of the petitioner has been rejected. When this Court has directed the plaintiff, namely the writ petitioner herein to approach the electricity authority for transfer of service connection and the electricity board was directed to consider the same, the request of the petitioner cannot be rejected.

In view of the above said facts, the order impugned in the writ petition is set aside and the second respondent, the Assistant Electrical Engineer, TNEB, Sub Station, Satchiyapuram, Sivakasi West, Virughunagar District is directed to consider the request of the petitioner and effect name transfer. The said exercise shall be completed within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

With the above said observations, this writ petition stands allowed. No costs.