Judgment :- Since the issue involved and the prayer sought for in all the writ petitions are one and the same, a common order is being passed. .2. The case of the petitioners are as follows:- .The petitioners are all working in the Judicial Department in City Civil Court, Chennai and belonged to the lower income group. The Government provided the housing plots in Foreshore Estate Housing Board,on payment of rent. Since, the date of allotment, the petitioners have been in occupation of the houses and paying the rents to the Government without any default. While so, the Housing Board all of a sudden decided to evict the occupants/the petitioners from the flats in the Foreshore Estate, on the ground that the buildings are old and in a dilapidated condition. The petitioners raised an objection for eviction and prayed for an alternate accommodation to the occupants in the event of eviction. But without considering the same, the respondents are keen on evicting the petitioner and are attempting to proceed with their illegal plan. When the 4th respondent/Housing Board started troubling the petitioners, they filed a Writ Petition in 1002 of 2008 and the same is pending before this Court. This Court has also directed the respondents in that writ petition to ascertain whether any suitable alternative accommodation could be made. However, the alternate accommodation chosen and shown by the respondents are constructed by the Tamil Nadu Slum Clearance Board at Semmenchary, 35 Kms away from the City. Whereas the petitioner seek an alternative accommodation in and around the city only. Pending that issue, the respondents have arbitrarily disconnected the electricity supply to the petitioners flats on 13.07.2009 without any prior notice and since then the petitioners are suffering without electricity supply. Hence, the petitioners have filed the above writ petition for the aforesaid prayer. .3. I have heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and Mr.A.Selventhiran, the learned counsel appeared for the respondents 1 and 2 and Mr.P.Wilson, the learned Additional Advocate General, appearing for the respondents 3 and 4 and Mr.R.Neelakandan, the learned Government Advocate, for the 5th respondents. 4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit that when the respondents took steps illegally to evict the petitioners, the petitioners and others filed W.P.No.1002 of 2008 before this Court and the same is pending. 4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit that when the respondents took steps illegally to evict the petitioners, the petitioners and others filed W.P.No.1002 of 2008 before this Court and the same is pending. The learned Additional Advocate General, who is appearing in this case, is appearing in that case also. While so, the electricity supply to the petitioners have been disconnected on 13.07.2009 without any rhyme or reason. He adds that the disconnection of electricity has been effected at the instance of 4th respondent/the Housing Board. This action of the Housing Board warrants interference by this Court. Therefore, he submits that the disconnected electricity supply to the petitioner should be restored immediately. 5. Per contra, the learned Additional Advocate General, appearing for the respondents 3 and 4 while reiterating the averments made in the common counter affidavit filed, on behalf of the respondent 3 and 4, would submit that the condition of these flats have become worse and they are in a precarious condition. and they are unfit for occupation. The condition has worsened after "Tusnami". He adds that many of the occupants have vacated and handed over vacant flats for the purpose of demolition and reconstruction. He further submits that it was also found that there is electrical leakage in certain blocks as the electrical wires installed in the flats are totally damaged and live wires are exposed. This will lead to short circuit of electricity posing imminent danger to the properties and to the occupants. Considering the emergency and to ensure safety of the occupants, the electricity supply was directed to be disconnected on 13.07.2009. The learned Additional Advocate General further submits that the occupation in the said building is no longer advisable and in the interest of the petitioners they themselves may vacate the hand over possession as done by other occupants. The learned Additional Advocate General further adds that alternate accommodation provided at Chemanchery by the Housing Board has been accepted by the many persons and only a few persons like that the petitioners have not accepted the offer and continue to reside in the places at high risk. The learned Additional Advocate General further adds that alternate accommodation provided at Chemanchery by the Housing Board has been accepted by the many persons and only a few persons like that the petitioners have not accepted the offer and continue to reside in the places at high risk. The learned Additional Advocate General submits that if the petitioners undertake that they will not claim any compensation for any mishap or accident occurs in restoring the electricity, without holding the Tamil Nadu Electricity Board or Tamil Nadu Housing Board or the Government responsible for the same, the Board is ready and willing to take steps to restore the electricity supply. 6. I am unable to accept the submissions made by the learned Additional Advocate General, appearing for the respondents 3 and 4 and the learned counsel appearing for the Electricity Board. Admittedly, the petitioners are residing in the flats in Foreshore Estate, which has been duly allotted to them. Admittedly, a writ petition has also been filed by the petitioners in W.P.No.1002 of 2008 against the threat of eviction and the same is pending. In that writ petition, the petitioners have sought for an alternative accommodation in and around city to enable them to vacate the present flats. Thus the issue of alternative accommodation as sought for by the petitioners is to be decided in the pending writ petition and it is not for this Court to go into the merits of that issue. 7. However, pending that issue, the respondent Housing Board ought not to have instigated the TNEB to disconnect the electricity to the petitioners on 13.07.2009. It is needless to add that right to electricity service connection is virtually a part of the Fundamental Rights guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India, since this is very intimately connected with the right to life in the present day situation. 8. Under these circumstances, I direct the Electricity Board to restore the Electricity supply to the petitioners premises forth with. 9. In the result, the writ petition is allowed. No costs. Consequently, connected M.Ps. are closed.