M MOHANRAJ Vs. ASSISTANT ENGINEER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) CHALLENGE is made to the order of the learned Single Judge made in WP.No.3486 of 1994 whereby the writ petition filed by the petitioner seeking writ of certiorarified mandamus to quash the order of the second respondent in Letter No.Tho.P/Va.A/Ko.A1/94/Camp.1 dated 8.2.1994 was dismissed.

(2.) THE case of the petitioner in short was that the writ petitioner was enjoying the benefit of electricity supplied by the respondent, that at a later point of time, the petitioner applied to the 1st respondent for installation of electric pump set in his well in Survey No.17/2 and for that the respondent demanded No Objection Certificate. Under such circumstances, he filed a writ petition before this Court to the effect that such demand was not proper. But, the Court after hearing both sides in the earlier writ petition in W.P.No.10253 of 1984 has made an order directing the respondent to conduct the enquiry after affording opportunity to the petitioner and pass suitable orders. On enquiry, the order under challenge came to be passed. Aggrieved over the same, the petitioner preferred writ petition which was dismissed by the learned single Judge.

(3.) AFTER doing so, this Court is of the considered opinion that the appeal does not merit whatsoever. It is not in controversy that on an application made by the petitioner , the service connection was given to him and it was enjoyed by the petitioner/appellant. While the matter stood thus, he made an application for electrical energy for the pump set in his Well in S.No.17/2 and for that, the respondent demanded No Objection Certificate and hence it is clear that the second respondent Electricity Board insisted for No objection certificate for energisation of pump sets in Moolathurai Reservoir Water storage area to avoid illegal tapping of water from the river bed. The Electricity Board likewise in all other River beds, insisted for No Objection Certificate where the pump sets were installed or electrical energy was sought for from the water area and hence it was insisted and in the above Moolathurai Reservoir Water Storage area, there was an inter state agreement between Tamil Nadu and Kerala. Under Such circumstances, the demand of No Objection certificate was perfectly correct, so that illegal attachment of water can be avoided. Further it is added that after passing of the order in W.P.No. 10263 of 1984, a direction was given for affording an opportunity to the petitioner. It is not the case of the petitioner that no opportunity was given, but at this juncture, it is pertinent to say that though the opportunity was given, the respondent gave a finding against the petitioner. Therefore, the grievance ventilated by the petitioner has no basis at all. Hence, the learned Single Judge has passed an order which is a reasoned order, which in the opinion of this Court does not require any interference. Accordingly, the writ appeal is dismissed. No costs.