S.Mahadevan, v. Ravi,

Page1 of 7 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 30-07-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V. KARTHIKEYAN AND THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE R.SAKTHIVEL WA(MD) Nos. 903 & 905 of 2026 AND CMP(MD) Nos.7776 & 7783 of 2026 W.A.(MD)No.903 of 2026: S.Mahadevan, Managing Director, Eurus Helios Energy Infra Private Limited, at SNC, KRM Towers, 4th Floor, No.1, Harrington Road, Chetpet, Chennai - 600 031. Current address, Sf 59/3, 59/4, 59/2, Mangamma Salai, Thekkampatti, Theni, Andipatti, 625517. ..Petitioner(s) Vs

¶1Ravi

¶2The District Collector, District Collector Office,

¶3The Director (Generation), TANGEDCO, No.144, Anna Salai, Chennai - 600 002

¶4The Chief Engineer Civil/ Transmission, TANTRANSCO, No.144, Anna Salai, Chennai-600 002. Page2 of 7

¶5The Superintending Engineer General, Construction Circle, Tamil Nadu Transmission Corporation Limited, K. Pudur, Madurai - 02

¶6The Assistant Executive Engineer, TANGEDCO, Palanichettipatti, ..Respondent(s) WA(MD) No. 905 of 2026 S. Mahadevan, Managing Director, Eurus Helios Energy Infra Private Limited,at SNC, KRM Towers, 4th Floor, No.1, Harrington Road, Chetpet, Chennai - 600 031. Current address, Sf 59/3, 59/4, 59/2, Mangamma Salai, Thekkampatti, Theni, Andipatti, 625517. ..Petitioner(s) Vs

¶1Malaiyarasan,

¶2The District Collector, District Collector Office,

¶3The Director (Generation), TANGEDCO, No.144, Anna Salai, Chennai - 600 002.

¶4The Chief Engineer Civil/ Transmission, TANTRANSCO, No.144, Anna Salai, Chennai - 600 002. Page3 of 7

¶5The Superintending Engineer General, Construction Circle, Tamil Nadu Transmission Corporation Limited, K. Pudur, Madurai - 02.

¶6The Assistant Executive Engineer, TANGEDCO, Palanichettipatti,

¶7The Tamil Nadu Electricity Regulatory Authority, Chennai. ..Respondent(s) COMMON PRAYER: Writ Appeals filed under Clause 15 of Letters patent, praying to set aside the order dated 01.06.2026 made in W.P.(MD)No.29321 of 2025 & 5050 of 2026. WA(MD) No. 903 of 2026: For Appellant(s): Mr.Arun Kumaar For Respondent(s): For Appellant : For Respondents : Mr.S.I.Muthiah (R2) Counsel for the State Mr.S.Deenadhayalan (R3) Standing Counsel Mr.Arun Kumar Mr.S.I.Muthiah (R2) Counsel for State Mr.S.Deenadhayalan (R3 to R7) Standing Counsel Page4 of 7 COMMON JUDGMENT (Judgment of the Court was delivered by C.V.Karthikeyan J.) The sixth respondent in W.P.(MD)Nos.5050 of 2026 and 29321 of 2025 is the appellant herein.

2.The said writ petitions have been filed seeking interference with the orders issued by the first respondent in the writ petitions/District Collector, Theni District and to quash the same. The orders were issued under the powers conferred under Sections 10 and 16 of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885 r/w Sections 67, 68 and 164 of the Electricity Act, 2003 granting permission to the appellant herein to carry out works relating to erection and maintenance of transmission lines over the immoveable properties of, among others, the writ petitioners. Complaining that such order directly interfered with their peaceful possession, the writ petitions have been filed.

3.The learned Single Judge in the order impugned was of the opinion that the electricity lines ran through the lands of the writ petitioners and therefore, objections had been raised by the petitioners. The contention of the appellant that Rule 21 of the Electricity (Amendment) Rules, 2024 creates a deemed Page5 of 7 fiction in the sense that the appellant is a private player, was rejected by the learned Single Judge.

4.Questioning primarily that particular reasoning, the appellant is on appeal before us. It is informed that pending appeals, compensation had been paid to the writ petitioners. In both the Writ Appeals, nothing survives for adjudication. The learned Counsel for the appellant also made the following endorsement: "I am not pressing this appeal"

5.We would clarify that Section 21 (4) of the aforementioned Act is encompassed with the concept of the provision of deemed license and therefore, the operation of the appellant cannot be said to be either illegal or unlawful, nor the order of the District Collector be impinged on that particular ground. Therefore, we uphold the order of the District Collector. However, since the learned Counsel withdraws writ appeals, we record that the writ appeals are dismissed as withdrawn. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. There shall be no order as to costs. (C.V.K.,J.) (R.S.V.,J.) 30-07-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order ta Page6 of 7 To

¶1The District Collector, District Collector Office,

¶2The Director (Generation), TANGEDCO, No.144, Anna Salai, Chennai - 600 002

¶3The Chief Engineer Civil/ Transmission, TANTRANSCO, No.144, Anna Salai, Chennai-600 002.

¶4The Superintending Engineer General, Construction Circle, Tamil Nadu Transmission Corporation Limited, K. Pudur, Madurai - 02

¶5The Assistant Executive Engineer, TANGEDCO, Palanichettipatti, Page7 of 7 C.V.KARTHIKEYAN J. AND R.SAKTHIVEL J. ta WA(MD) Nos. 903 & 905 of 2026 30-07-2026