Judgment : The petitioner-S.Charulatha, D/o.P.Sarojini Amma, has filed the present writ petition seeking for a writ of mandamus to direct the Executive Engineer, Operational & Maintenance / Adayar, Tamil Nadu Electricity Board (TNEB), Taramani Road, Chennai – 113 / third respondent herein, to enquire and submit a report upon the petitioner's representation dated 03.06.2013. 2. According to her, land admeasuring 2400 sqft., out of 2 acre and 24 cents, in Survey No.129, at Door No.1, Karunambigai Colony, Velacherry Village, Chennai, owned by the fourth respondent temple, was leased out to the petitioner's mother – P.Sarojini Amma on 01.06.1972. Thereafter, she has fenced the property and constructed the building. She was paying rent to the fourth respondent temple without any default. The said Sarojini Amma died on 01.09.2000, leaving behind the petitioner as the only legal heir. She has requested the Executive Officer of the fourth respondent temple to enter her name, as tenant in the place of her deceased mother – Sarojini Amma, with respect to the above said property. But, the said request has not been accepted. After several demands, the Executive Officer of the fourth respondent temple gave a reply, in his letter dated 26.08.2003, to the petitioner, stating that the above said property now stands in the name of one T.Selvi Thankaraj. 3. It is the case of the petitioner that the transfer of the name, from Mrs.P.Sarojini Ammal to one T.Selvi Thankaraj has been done fraudulently. The petitioner also came to know that electricity service connection has been altered in the name of T.Selvi Thankaraj. Though the petitioner has requested the first respondent to furnish the details, as to how the change of name was effected in favour T.Selvi Thankaraja, no details were furnished. Hence, the petitioner was constrained to approach the authorities under the Right to Information Act, 2005. 4. The petitioner has further contended that the State Information Commissioner, Chennai, by order dated 06.11.2012, has directed the Public Information Officer / Office of the Tamil Nadu Electricity Generation and Distribution Co-operative Limited, Chennai, to furnish the information sought for, by the writ petitioner as to how and on what basis of which, the change of name has been effected in favour of T.Selvi Thankaraj, and also the document pertaining to electricity service connection. Pursuant to the above said order of the State Information Commissioner, Chennai, the Executive Engineer, Operational & Maintenance/Adayar, TNEB, Chennai, has informed the petitioner that Service Account No.288-003-29 which stood in the name of Tmt.P.Sarojiniammal, D/o.P.Damodaran Pillai, has been changed in favour of T.Selvi, during the year 19811983, and that supporting documents could not be traceable in their office. Having received the abovesaid information from the Public Information Officer, Electricity Department, the petitioner has sent a notice to the Executive Engineer, to conduct an enquiry and forward the same to the Vigilance Commissioner. The reply dated 13.03.2013 of the Executive Engineer/Operational& Maintenance / Adayar, Chennai, addressed to the petitioner's Advocate, discloses that an enquiry was conducted, at the office of the Assistant Executive Engineer / Operational & Maintenance / Velachery, Chennai, and thereafter, the petitioner seemed to have made a representation dated 03.06.2013 to the State Vigilance Commissioner, Chennai. In response to the same, the Secretary, Vigilance Commission, Chennai, vide letter No.2216/VC-1/2013-1, dated 19.06.2013, has requested the Secretary to the Government, Energy Department, Chennai, for necessary action to send action taken report to the petitioner. He has enclosed the copy of the original petition dated 03.06.2013. 5. When the matter came up for hearing on 30.09.2013, Mr.P.Gunaraj, learned Standing Counsel for TNEB, on instructions from the Executive Engineer (O & M), Adayar, TNEB, Chennai, submitted that the action had already been taken on the representation of the writ petitioner and since she did not appear before the authority concerned, file has been closed. This Court was not convinced with the reply. Hence, the learned counsel for TNEB was directed to instruct the Executive Engineer (O & M), Adayar, Chennai, to hold a detailed enquiry. Today, it is represented that, pursuant to the direction of this Court, notice has been sent to both parties viz. S.Charulatha/petitioner herein, and T.Selvi Thankaraj, to appear for an enquiry. In response to the notice dated 05.10.2013 issued by the Assistant Executive Engineer (O & M), Chennai-42, the writ petitioner has sent a reply requesting time for reply and also sought for a copy of the sale deed executed in favour of T.Selvi Thankaraj. 6. Learned counsel for the Electricity Board further submitted that letters have also been sent to the Sub-Registrar, Saidapet, Chennai, to furnish copy of the sale deed, said to have been executed, in favour of T.Selvi Thankaraj. 6. Learned counsel for the Electricity Board further submitted that letters have also been sent to the Sub-Registrar, Saidapet, Chennai, to furnish copy of the sale deed, said to have been executed, in favour of T.Selvi Thankaraj. He further submitted that the said T.Selvi Thankaraj has also produced a copy of the sale deed dated 16.10.1981, said to have been executed by P.P.Sarojiniammal and K.Karunakaran, in her favour, in relation to the subject property in dispute. 7. Today, a copy of the sale deed executed in favour of one T.Selvi Thankaraj has been furnished to Ms.P.T.Asha, learned counsel for the writ petitioner. Since an enquiry into the representation of the writ petitioner is being conducted by giving adequate opportunity to both parties, it would be inappropriate on the part of this Court to make any observation, into the issues. But, at the same time, this Court is of the view that when the Secretary of the Vigilance Commission, Chennai, has sought for an "actiontaken report" on the representation of the petitioner, it would be proper to issue a direction to the Executive Engineer (Operational & Maintenance), Chennai / third respondent herein, to send a report to the Secretary of the Government, Energy Department, Chennai, as requested in the letter dated 19.06.2013. The enquiry report shall be sent as expeditiously as possible by not later than six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Needless to state that the writ petitioner/S.Charulatha and T.Selvi Thankaraj, though not a party to the writ petition, extend their co-operation for submission of the report, within the time limit as stated supra. With the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of. No Costs.