Ganesamoorthy vs Assistant Engineer

Type Court Judgment Court Chennai Decided Feb 26, 2026

~1 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1413814

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/1413814
Court: Chennai High Court
Judge: Honourable Ms. Justice P.T. Asha
Decided On: Feb 26, 2026
Case Number: WP/1118/2026

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Ganesamoorthy

Respondent

Assistant Engineer

Excerpt

today, the matter has been brought under the caption “for being mentioned” at the instance of the learned counsel for the petitioner.2. when the matter is taken up, the learned counsel for thepetitioner submitted that in paragraph no.7 of the order dated 26.02.2026, it has wrongly been mentioned as there is no impediment for the grant of electricity service connection to the petitioner instead of there is no impediment for disconnecting the service connection. hence, the same requires correction.3. heard the learned counsel for the petitioner.4. in view of the above, the last sentence of paragraph no.7 of theorder shall be replaced as follows:“7….. in such circumstances, there is no impediment for disconnecting the service connection to the petitioner.” mrp5. registry is directed to carryout necessary correction and issue a fresh order copy to the parties. all other portions of the order shall remain unaltered. 10.04.2026 mrp

Full Judgment

Today, the matter has been brought under the caption “for being mentioned” at the instance of the learned counsel for the petitioner.
2. When the matter is taken up, the learned counsel for the
petitioner submitted that in paragraph No.7 of the order dated 26.02.2026, it has wrongly been mentioned as there is no impediment for the grant of electricity service connection to the petitioner instead of there is no impediment for disconnecting the service connection. Hence, the same requires correction.
3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner.
4. In view of the above, the last sentence of paragraph No.7 of the

order shall be replaced as follows:

“7….. In such circumstances, there is no impediment for disconnecting the service connection to the petitioner.” mrp

5. Registry is directed to carryout necessary correction and issue a fresh order copy to the parties. All other portions of the order shall remain unaltered. 10.04.2026 mrp

Same Court & Year Chennai · 2026 Same Parties Ganesamoorthy vs Assistant Engineer Same Judge Honourable Ms. Justice P.T. Asha