- Court
- High Court of Madras
- Decided
- 4 October 2023
- Bench
- B.Pugalendhi
- Case no.
- WP(MD) 5851/2016
Judgment
O R D E R The petitioner with a grievance that the respondent Board have erected the transformer in front of his property and has occupied half of the property and therefore, he has submitted a representation to shift the transformer and filed this Writ Petition in the year 2016.
¶2The learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents submits that the transformer was erected several years back and it is in existence for the past several years and it is not feasible to remove the transformer as on this date.
¶3This Court considered the rival submissions made on either side.
¶4In the event, if the petitioner is preferred to pay the required amount for shifting the transformer and if any other feasible place is available to the respondent Board for shifting the transformer, then the respondent Board shall consider the representation of the petitioner sympathetically.
¶5With the above direction, this Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
04.10.2023 NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No RM To The Assistant Engineer (O & M), TANGEDCO, TNEB, Athikulam Section, Narayanapuram, Madurai – 625 014.
B.PUGALENDHI, J. RM
04.10.2023
Case details
Parties and counsel
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 04.10.2023 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE B.PUGALENDHI and W.M.P.(MD) No.5209 of 2016 V. Karthikeyan ...Petitioner Vs. The Assistant Engineer (O & M), TANGEDCO, TNEB, Athikulam Section, Narayanapuram, Madurai – 625 014. .....Respondent PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records relating to the Respondent made in f/vz;/ c-kpbgh-g-M/Fsk;-ng/M-nfh/kp/kh/,-f/jdp-m/ vz;/370-15 ehs; 25.11.2015 and quash the same and consequently direct the Respondent to remove the transformer and pole erected in front of petitioner's property. For Petitioner : Mr.R. Murali For Respondent : Mr.S. Deenadhayalan Standing Counsel
Source: High Court of Madras, through the eCourts High Court services, via the Indian High Court Judgments open dataset by Dattam Labs (CC BY 4.0). Text was extracted from the official PDF and may contain conversion errors. Check the official PDF before relying on it.