Selvaraj S v. The Superintending Engineer

O R D E R Heard Mr.S.Mandhira Lingeswaran, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Mr.S.Deenadhayalan, learned Standing Counsel for the respondents 1 to 3.

2.It is stated by the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents 1 to 3 that by order, dated 10.03.2023, that the application of the petitioner had been rejected. Let a copy be served on the petitioner in normal course. As a matter of fact, copy had been given today to the learned Counsel for the petitioner.

3.The issue raised in this writ Petition has become infructuous,. The petitioner can take the issue forward in manner know to law. The Writ Petition stands dismissed as infructuous. No costs.

Index :Yes / No

11.04.2023 Internet :Yes NCC : Yes/No cmr

C.V.KARTHIKEYAN, J.

cmr W.P.(MD)No.5118 of 2023

11.04.2023

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 11.04.2023 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.V.KARTHIKEYAN W.P.(MD)No.5118 of 2023 S.Selvaraj ... Petitioner vs. 1.The Superintending Engineer, TANGEDCO, Thoothukudi District. 2.The Assistant Executive Engineer (Distribution), TANGEDCO, Srivaikundam, Thoothukudi District. 3.The Junior Engineer, TANGEDCO, Eral, Thoothukudi District. 4.R.Thangaraj ... Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of Mandamus, to direct the respondents No.1 to 3 not to provide electricity connection to the fourth respondent to the petitioner's property in Survey No.35/3A2 at Korkai Village, Eral Taluk, Thoothukudi District based on the petitioner's representation, dated 03.03.2023. For Petitioner :Mr.S.Mandhira Lingeswaran For R1 to R3 :Mr.S.Deenadhayalan For R4 :No Appearance. *****