N. PAKKIAM Vs. THE DIVISIONAL ENGINEER

JUDGEMENT

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

(2.) THE petitioner additionally added that she is entitled to a perinela supply of water and electric energy and hence she has applied for new electricity connection before the second respondent on 20.04.2014 and the second respondent received her application and rejected the electricity application on the ground of invalid reason, the denial attitude by the second respondent states in reply letter that she does not have address proof and Tax receipt is a baseless reason, against the natural justice and the second respondent violated the Constitution of India because she is a senior citizen of India, her son also did not take care of her while being so the second respondent as Superior Officer did not mind about her basic amenities.

(3.) THE second respondent has not yet provided basic infrastructure to the poor people like her, and is now not accepting her request for providing electricity connection and the second respondent has given reply letter to her dated 05.05.2013 and informed her that the application for service connection would be not be available for seven reasons.