CHENNIMALAI GOUNDER Vs. GOVERNMENT OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Aggrieved by the Order of the fourth respondent-Assistant Engineer (O and M), Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, Jedarpalayam, imposing certain conditions for grant of power connection for his agricultural pump-set, the petitioner has filed the above writ petition to quash the same and for direction to the respondents to give Service Connection to the petitioner's pump-set in his well in Survey No. 287/6B, in E, Nalla Goundanpalayam village, Paramathi Velur Taluk.

(2.) According to the petitioner, the Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, under Revised Self Financing Scheme, promised and assured to give special priority to the agricultural applicants, for energisation of pump-sets, who come forward to pay Rs. 10,000/- service connection and also Rs. 250/- per H.P.per annum, towards electricity consumption charges. As per the said scheme, he had paid a sum of Rs. 500/- on 17-4-1995 and expressed his willingness to avail service connection through the Revised Self Financing Scheme. Further, as directed by the Executive Engineer, Paramathi-Velur, he had also paid another sum of Rs. 9,500/- by cash on 30-8-1996. According to him, he had also purchased 7.5 H.P.mono-block pump-set and other accessories. The respondents are bound to give service connection and they cannot go behind the terms and conditions of the said Scheme. While so, the Assistant Engineer at Jedarpalayam, by his notice dated 19-9-1996, called upon him to get the consent of the owner of Survey No. 287/6C, to take the electrical wires from the post in Survey No. 287/6C, to give service connection to his well in Survey No. 287/6B stating that the said owner has objected to the taking of the electrical wires from the electrical post in Survery No. 287/6C.Inasmuch as it is the responsibility and legal obligation of the respondents to provide him service connection, particularly when they have collected required amount under the scheme for giving service connection, they are duty bound to provide service connection. In such circumstances, the petitioner has filed the above writ petition before this Court.

(3.) Third respondent has filed a counter affidavit disputing various averments made by the petitioner.