SIVAPRAKASAM Vs. JUNIOR ENGINEER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Mr.Sivaprakasam, petitioner as party in person; Mr.G.Vasudevan learned counsel appearing for the respondents 1 to 7 and 9 and Mr. S. Rajendiran learned counsel appearing for the 10th respondent.

(2.) THE prayer of the petitioner is for a direction to the respondents 1 to 9 to provide electricity service connection to the petitioner in respect of his pump-set well situate in the schedule mentioned land, with a further direction to award an amount of compensation of Rs. 50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) to the petitioner herein.

(3.) FURTHER it was stated that the fact was properly explained to the petitioner Thiru.Sivapragasam and he was advised to get the consent of his brothers in writing so as to effect the free agricultural service connection in the name of Thiru.A. Sivapragasam. At this juncture, the petitioner Sivapragasam has failed to produced the consent from his brothers and moved this Court with the present petition and got a direction to the 2nd respondent to inspect the site in question in the presence of the respective parties and verify as to what are all the wells situated in the area in question and the persons in occupation and file a report before this Court within a period of three weeks. As per the order, the following report is submitted : " A Joint inspection notice was issued on 10.09.2012 to the Thiru. Pitchaipilla, Thiru. Sivapragasam and Thiru. Subramanian, who are the legal heirs of late Adhimoolam. The above site was inspected by the 2nd respondent accompanied by the Village Administrative Officers of that particular revenue village in the presence of Thiru.Subramaniaan, the 10th respondent. The petitioner was not available in the village. I am submitting the inspection report, which is as follows :