RAJENDRA R MEHTA Vs. TAMIL NADU ELECTRICITY BOARD,; CHIEF ENGINEER (COMMERCIAL), TAMIL NADU ELECTRICITY BOARD; SUPERINTENDENT ENGINEER, CEDC / SOUTH, TAMIL NADU ELECTRICITY BOARD; ASSISTANT ENGINEER (O & M), TAMIL NADU ELECTRICITY BOARD; CHENNAI METROPOLITAN DEVELOPMENT

JUDGEMENT

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

(2.) The writ petitioner is the owner and developer of the property situated at T.S.No.80/1 to 12, 113/2, 3 & 4, Block No.38 of Arunachalam Road, Saligramam, Chennai - 93 and he had applied for planning permission to construct Block (A, B, C) Basement + stilt + 17 floors, Block D, Multilevel parking (4 floors) with swimming pool, Block E, Basement + ground floor, service block. Accordingly, the fifth respondent herein, viz., The Chennai Metropolitan Development Authority has approved planning permission for construction of the same under permit No.5960, dated 17.05.2011 and obtained building permission from the Corporation of Chennai in CEBA/ CD08 / 00142 / 2011, dated 11.06.2011. In accordance with the planning permission, the petitioner put up the building thereon. The entire construction was over as early as in the month of December 2013. The petitioner additionally added that there are no major deviations and violations in constructions except incompletion of additional common amenities in the building. As the building is ready for occupation, the petitioner approached the third and fourth respondents herein, viz., the Superintending Engineer and the Assistant Engineer (O & M), who are attached to the Tamil Nadu Electricity Board to receive the application for providing electricity service connection. The third and fourth respondents insisted that the petitioner should enclose the completion certificate from the fifth respondent herein, for receiving and considering the said application. Hence, they refused to receive the application for providing the electricity service connection.

(3.) The third respondent has filed a counter statement on behalf of other respondents 1, 2 and 4, who are attached to the Tamil Nadu Electricity Board. The third respondent submits that in the first instance, the above writ petition is neither maintainable in law nor on facts in as much as the fact admitted by the petitioner in the affidavit itself that the building to which electricity supply is sought comprises of basement, stilt and 17 floors etc., and as such, the petitioner is bound to produce completion certificate issued by the fifth respondent herein / Chennai Metropolitan Development Authority in terms of the orders passed by the Hon'ble First Bench of this Court in W.P.Nos.18898 of 2009 and etc, batch dated 23.08.2006 and as reiterated by this Court by a common order dated 06.09.2013 in W.P.Nos.16780 of 2013 and etc., batch. Further, the claim of the petitioner to provide electricity supply without insisting on completion certificate / no objection certificate is against the statutory provisions contained in the Tamil Nadu Electricity Distribution Code, 2004 i.e., "other compliances" under Regulation 27(1) r/w the explanation after regulation 27(16) of the said Code and as such, the petitioner is not entitled to any mandamus as against the orders of this Court and the statutory provisions.