Judgment This writ petition is filed for the issuance of a writ of mandamus restraining the respondents, their men and their agents from interfering with the petitioners possession and enjoyment of the land or entering upon the petitioners property comprised at S.No.308/1 K. Ayyampalaym Village, Palladam Taluk, Coimbatore District measuring to an extent of 33. 5 acres. 2. The case of the petitioner is that she is the owner of the abovesaid land and she has raised crops also in the said land and her entire family is depending upon the income from the abovesaid land for their livelihood; the second respondent had a proposal to install a high tension power line through the land of one Subbayya Gounder which is adjacent to her land, however, since the owners of the lands which are adjacent to her lands, are influential persons, on the payment made by them, installation of high tension power line through the said lands was dropped. But, it is the case of the petitioner that consequence of this, steps were taken to install the high tension power line in the land of the petitioner. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, since the petitioners agricultural activity in the said land will get affected, the petitioner had raised objections, however, the same was not considered; during the pendency of the earlier writ petition, direction was given to the District Collector to consider the petitioners objection and to pass orders on the same and even subsequent to this, since no orders were passed and since steps were taken for the erection of high tension power line, the petitioner has approached this Court with the present writ petition. 3. On notice, the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the first respondent has brought to the notice of this Court that the petitioners objection was heard and the District Collector also has passed an order and the same has been served on the petitioner and since the petitioner had refused to receive the same, it was affixed on the doors of her residence. 4. 4. But, according to the learned counsel for the petitioner, as far as erection of high tension power line is concerned, the same is governed by the provisions of the Electricity Act, 2003 under Section 171 of the said Act, the mode of service of the notice, orders or documents is dealt with and the same reads as follows: "171. Service of notices, orders or documents: .(1) Every notice, order or document by or under this Act required, or authorized to be addressed to any person may be served on him by delivering the same after obtaining signed acknowledgment receipt therefor or by registered post or such means of delivery as may be prescribed - (a) where the Appropriate Government is the addressee, at the office of such officer as the Appropriate Government may prescribe in this behalf; (b) where the Appropriate Commission is the addressee, at the office of the Appropriate Commission; (c) where a company is the addressee, at the registered office of the company or, in the event of the registered office of the company not being in India, at the head office of the company in India; (d) where any person is the addressee, at the usual or last known place of abode or business of the person. (2) Every notice, order or document by or under this Act required or authorized to be addressed to the owner or occupier of any premises shall be deemed to be properly addressed if addressed by the description of the owner or occupier of the premises (naming the premises), and may be served by delivering it, or a true copy thereof, to some person on the premises, or if there is no person on the premises to whom the same can with reasonable diligence be delivered, by affixing it on some conspicuous part of the premises. and that apart, according to the learned counsel for the petitioner, subsequently, specific rules have been issued in 2004 viz., The means of delivery of notice, order or document and Rule 3 of the said Rules which deals with the mode of delivery of notice reads as under: "3. and that apart, according to the learned counsel for the petitioner, subsequently, specific rules have been issued in 2004 viz., The means of delivery of notice, order or document and Rule 3 of the said Rules which deals with the mode of delivery of notice reads as under: "3. Means of delivery of notice, order or document:- Every notice, order of document by or under this Act required, or authorized to be addressed to any person may in addition to the mans provided in sub-section (1) of Section 171 may also be delivered by any of the following means:- (a) through special messenger and obtaining signed acknowledgment; or (b) by telegraphic message; or (c) by fax; or (d) by e-mail. 5. Admittedly, as far as the mode of service of notice is concerned, the relevant procedure under the Act or under the Rules has not been followed. But, the stand of the learned Additional Government Pleader is that since as per Section 171 of the Electricity Act, 2003, delivery or any notice after obtaining the signed acknowledged receipt is also one of the prescribed modes; when an attempt was made to serve it to the person of the petitioner, since he refused to receive the same, affixture was followed. I am not able to agree with this stand of the learned Additional Government Pleader. When a particular Act prescribes a particular mode of service of notice or document, only that particular mode has to be followed. Under Section 171 of the Electricity Act, 2003, in addition to personal service of notice, the other mode prescribed is by way of registered post. In the event of the petitioner not receiving the said notice, since one other mode i.e. registered post is prescribed, the respondents ought to have followed that procedure and instead of doing so, affixture is not an authorized mode as far as the issue relating to the Electricity Act, 2003 is concerned. 6. Hence, the respondents are directed to serve the order dated 012. 2008 passed by the District Magistrate to the petitioner as per the mode prescribed under Section 171 of the Electricity Act, 2003, read with the means of delivery of notice, order or document Rules, 2004. 6. Hence, the respondents are directed to serve the order dated 012. 2008 passed by the District Magistrate to the petitioner as per the mode prescribed under Section 171 of the Electricity Act, 2003, read with the means of delivery of notice, order or document Rules, 2004. Since already orders have been passed considering the objection raised by the petitioner, the petitioner, on receipt of the orders passed by the concerned authority, is at liberty to approach the appropriate Court. 7. Further, according to the learned counsel for the second respondent, already, high tension power line has been erected in the land in question. Till the order dated 012. 2008 passed by the competent authority is served on the petitioner, status quo as on today, shall be maintained. With the above directions, this writ petition is closed. Connected M.P. in Closed.