A. IYYAPPARAJ Vs. THE CHAIRMAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE short facts of the case are as follows: -

(2.) THE petitioner further submits that the respondents 1 to 3 demanded production of completion certificate, which is an arbitrary one. It was submitted that during the course of construction, there were minor deviation which do not in any manner affect the structural stability or in gross violation of the Development Control Rules and the same has been done for satisfying additional needs of purchasers. Further, the said building is now ready for occupation and the occupants are also waiting for electricity service connection. Further, if there is any violation of the Development Control Rules, it has only been done to satisfy the additional needs of the purchasers. The right to electricity is a fundamental right guaranteed under Article 19(1) of the Constitution of India. As such, the respondents 1 to 3 cannot curb the same.

(3.) THE second respondent further stated that on enquiry of the writ petitioner, the third respondent, viz., Assistant Engineer (O & M), TNEB, Nanganallur, Chennai -61 had insisted the production of the completion certificate / no objection certificate from the fourth respondent, viz., CMDA, since it is stated by the writ petitioner that the electricity service connection requested is for a multi -storeyed building consisting of stilt + 4 floors with 12 dwelling units of residential building. Hence, as per the provisions of the Development Control Rules, the writ petitioner has to produce the completion certificate / no objection certificate obtained from the CMDA so as to get the electricity supply and the TANGEDCO cannot consider the request of the writ petitioner without submitting proper application along with the necessary required documents and the completion certificate / no objection certificate from the CMDA and hence, there is no merit in the above writ petition.