LAWS(MAD)-2013-9-213

V.SELVI Vs. ASSISTANT ENGINEER

Decided On September 25, 2013
V.Selvi Appellant
V/S
ASSISTANT ENGINEER Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner, who has constructed a house in Pappini Village, Kangeyam Taluk and assigned Door No.2/181 by the Pappini Panchayat Union, and assessed property tax, has made an application on 24.03.2012 for electricity service connection. After scrutinizing the application, the Assistant Engineer, Operation & Maintenance, TANGEDCO, Muthur, Tiruppur District, the 1st respondent vide letter dated 11.05.2012, has directed the petitioner to pay a sum of Rs.28,780/-. The said sum has been paid on 19.05.2012. Pursuant to the same, the 1st respondent has started the work to provide service connection. When they were about to carry out the lines through the posts, the Assistant Engineer, Operation & Maintenance, TANGEDCO, Muthur, Tiruppur District, the 1st respondent herein, vide letter dated 06.10.2012 has informed the petitioner that, one Minor @ T.Palanisamy, the President of Pappini Panchayat Union, the 2nd respondent herein has raised objections for erection of the posts, in front of Periyanayagi Amman Temple. He has also stated that erection of posts and electricity supply would cause hindrance, while constructing a mandapam. Alongwith the communication dated 06.10.2012, the Assistant Engineer, Operation & Maintenance, TANGEDCO, Muthur, Tiruppur District, has also enclosed a copy of the objections submitted by the Panchayat Union. According to the petitioner, the objections are made out of personal enmity.

(2.) The Executive Officer, Arulmighu Periyanayagiamman Thirukoil, Pappini, P.pachapalayam Post, Kangeyam Taluk, Tiruppur District, the 3rd respondent has also made similar objections. On receipt of the same, the Assistant Engineer, Operation & Maintenance, TANGEDCO, Muthur, Tiruppur District, the 1st respondent herein has not taken any steps to effect service connection, but has blamed the petitioner, stating that he has not provided any alternate way.

(3.) The petitioner has further submitted that as per Section 43 of the Electricity Act, 2003, he is entitled to seek for electricity service connection, to his residential house. As electricity, is an indispensable need to live, deprivation of the same would amount to violation of Article 21 of the Constitution of India.