Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

K.Raghavan, vs the Assistant Executive Engineer

K.Raghavan, vs The Assistant Executive Engineer

Type Court Judgment Court Chennai Decided Apr 02, 2026
~5 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1433727

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

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Chennai High Court
Judge
Decided On
Case Number
WP/11186/2026

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

K.Raghavan,

Respondent

The Assistant Executive Engineer

Excerpt

.....connection was also changed to his name however, electricity service connection was not effected and in this regard, the petitioner made representation to the respondents and since there was noresponse, filed w.p.no.4771 of 2024 and pursuant to the order of this court dated 03.11.2025 made in the said writ petition, the present impugned order was passed stating that during the inspection on 12.01.2015, theft of energy was found and the petitioner was directed to pay rs.97,264/- and that if the petitioner pay the said amount, his request for free electricity service connection will be considered.3.the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, on instructions, further submitted that though the respondents claim penalty for the alleged commission of electricity theft found during the inspection conducted on 12.01.2015, till date the respondents did not take any effective steps to collect the amount either from the petitioner’s father or from the petitioner, however, inorder to give quietus, the petitioner is ready to pay the amount of rs.97,264/- and hence, this court may, without going into the merits of the case, issue direction to the respondents to effect electricity service connection, after receipt of the said amount, as per the seniority, in the manner known to law.4.the learned counsel appearing for the respondents submitted that the petitioner has to not only pay a sum of rs.97,264/- but also has to pay bpsc charges for the same. the learned counsel further submitted that the petitioner’s father has filed o.s.no.105 of 2019 for reconnection of the electricity connection and the same is pending before the principal district court, tirukovilur. 5.heard the arguments advanced on either side and perused the materials available on record.6.it is not in dispute that the petitioner’s father had obtained free electricity service connection. it is also not in dispute that due to old age ailments, the petitioner’s father executed registered settlement deed.....

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 02.04.2026

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI K.Raghavan ... Petitioner Vs. 1.The Assistant Executive Engineer Operation & Maintenance TANGEDOCO, Thirukoilur West, Kallakurichi. 2.The Junior Engineer, Rishivandhiyam, Kallakurichi District. ... Respondents

Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for records on the file of the first respondent in proceedings Ka.No.U Se PO/Me /Thiruk/Va.Aa/ Ko.Kalapani/A.No.306/2025 dated 03.12.2025 and quash the same as illegal, incompetent and without jurisdiction and further directing the respondents to effect electricity service connection in S.No.74/2 Po.Moorappur Village, Manaloorpettai, Villupuram District.

For Petitioner : Ms.R.Poornima For Respondents : Mr.Swami Subramanian

ORDER

The petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for records on the file of the first respondent in proceedings Ka.No.U Se PO/Me /Thiruk/Va.Aa/ Ko.Kalapani/A.No.306/2025 dated 03.12.2025 and quash the same as illegal, incompetent and without jurisdiction and further directing the respondents to effect electricity service connection in S.No.74/2 Po.Moorappur Village, Manaloorpettai, Villupuram District.

2.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner’s father was the owner of the subject property and he had obtained free electricity service connection and due to old age ailments, the petitioner’s father executed registered Settlement deed on 18.05.2020 under Document No.717/2020 on the file of Sub Registrar, Manaloorpettai and patta was also mutated in the name of the petitioner and the petitioner approached the respondent for transfer of electricity service connection in his name and the electricity service connection was also changed to his name however, electricity service connection was not effected and in this regard, the petitioner made representation to the respondents and since there was no

response, filed W.P.No.4771 of 2024 and pursuant to the order of this Court dated 03.11.2025 made in the said writ petition, the present impugned order was passed stating that during the inspection on 12.01.2015, theft of energy was found and the petitioner was directed to pay Rs.97,264/- and that if the petitioner pay the said amount, his request for free electricity service connection will be considered.

3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, on instructions, further submitted that though the respondents claim penalty for the alleged commission of electricity theft found during the inspection conducted on 12.01.2015, till date the respondents did not take any effective steps to collect the amount either from the petitioner’s father or from the petitioner, however, inorder to give quietus, the petitioner is ready to pay the amount of Rs.97,264/- and hence, this Court may, without going into the merits of the case, issue direction to the respondents to effect electricity service connection, after receipt of the said amount, as per the seniority, in the manner known to law.

4.The learned counsel appearing for the respondents submitted that the petitioner has to not only pay a sum of Rs.97,264/- but also has to pay BPSC charges for the same. The learned counsel further submitted that the petitioner’s father has filed O.S.No.105 of 2019 for reconnection of the electricity connection and the same is pending before the Principal District Court, Tirukovilur. 5.Heard the arguments advanced on either side and perused the materials available on record.

6.It is not in dispute that the petitioner’s father had obtained free electricity service connection. It is also not in dispute that due to old age ailments, the petitioner’s father executed registered Settlement deed on 18.05.2020 under Document No.717/2020 on the file of Sub Registrar, Manaloorpettai and patta was also mutated in the name of the petitioner and the petitioner approached the respondent for transfer of electricity service connection in his name and the electricity service connection was also changed to his name however, electricity service connection was not effected on the allegation that during the inspection conducted on 12.01.2015, theft of energy was found and vide impugned order, the petitioner was directed to pay Rs.97,264/- along with BPSC charges.

7.It is also not in dispute that till date the respondents did not take any effective steps to collect the amount either from the petitioner’s father or from the petitioner. Now, the petitioner has come forward to pay the amount of Rs.97,264/-. It appears that O.S.No.105 of 2019 has been filed by the petitioner’s father for reconnection of electricity connection and the same is pending before the Principal District Court, Tirukovilur.

8.In view of the above, this Court directs the petitioner to pay the amount of Rs.97,264/-, without BPSC charges, without prejudice to his rights and contentions before the civil Court, within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. After receipt of the said amount from the petitioner, the respondents are directed to effect electricity service connection, in favour of the petitioner, as per the seniority.

9.The writ petition is disposed of. No costs. 02.04.2026 pri Index: Yes/ No Speaking Order: Yes/ No NCC: Yes/ No

M.DHANDAPANI,J.

pri To 1.The Assistant Executive Engineer Operation & Maintenance TANGEDOCO, Thirukoilur West, Kallakurichi. 2.The Junior Engineer, Rishivandhiyam, Kallakurichi District. 02.04.2026

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial