Judgment : 1. The brief facts of the case are as follows:- The writ petitioners are joint owners of the property situated at Plot in S.No.40/3, 7B1, 7C, Sivaboohtam Village, Karambakkam, Panchayat, Vanagaram, Chennai-95. They have applied and obtained sanction plan from the fifth respondent herein / Chennai Metropolitan Development Authority under permit No.C4327/33 A to D/2008 and file No.C2/1201/2007, dated 28.11.2008 for constructions of ground + 2 floors of industrial building and had accordingly commenced and completed the constructions in accordance with the said sanctioned plan. In order to effect electricity service connection, they have approached the office of the fourth respondent / Assistant Divisional Engineer (O&M), who are attached to the Tamil Nadu Electricity Board in the month of March 2014 with their application and necessary charges. The fourth respondent insisted upon production of completion certificate / no objection certificate from the fifth respondent herein to even receive their application and accordingly refused to receive the same for some minor negligible deviations. 2. The petitioners were made to understand that the Tamil Nadu Electricity Board / respondents 1 to 4 are demanding completion certificate from Chennai Metropolitan Development Authority due to an observation made by a Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court in a case initiated by consumer action groups and another against the regulation scheme of the CMDA. They further submit that but for that observation by the Hon'ble Bench, there is no corresponding legislative enactment or amendment in the Electricity Act, warranting or justifying such a demand of completion certificate / No objection certificate from the Chennai Metropolitan Development Authority. In fact earlier in the year 2002, there was a state amendment to demand completion certificate / no objection certificate for effecting electricity service connection but later the same was withdrawn vide G.O.Ms.No.112, Energy (B1), dated 05.07.2004, whereby, the Tamil Nadu Electricity Board was directed not to insist on completion certificate / no objection certificate from the Chennai Metropolitan Development Authority with effect from 10.06.2003, as the said condition was inconsistent and contrary to the Central Act as the electricity supply is in the concurrent list of the Indian Constitution. 3. The petitioners additionally added that at present, the Tamil Nadu Electricity Board started demanding completion certificate / no objection certificate for providing service connection without any such specific amendments to enable provisions, viz., Section 43 of the Electricity Act, 2003 (Central Act 36 of 2003). 3. The petitioners additionally added that at present, the Tamil Nadu Electricity Board started demanding completion certificate / no objection certificate for providing service connection without any such specific amendments to enable provisions, viz., Section 43 of the Electricity Act, 2003 (Central Act 36 of 2003). The subject building is strictly in accordance to the sanctioned plan accorded and in conformity to the exemption stipulated under the Development Regulations, but for some negligible unintentional increase in the first floor level and slight corresponding excess in floor space index, however, well within the permissible norms of the monitoring committee of the Chennai Metropolitan Development Authority and Urban Development Department of the Government. They further submit that but for the above said facts, there is neither any major violation nor excess in FSI and any different in usage of the building, warranting denial of power supply as held by the same Division Bench in W.A.No.1102 of 2007, in appeal filed by the Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, whereby the said appeal was dismissed as the deviations complained are minor in nature in the absence of floor violation by order dated 04.09.2007. 4. The petitioner further added that following this Division Bench's decision, this Court was pleased to consider several writ petitions after perusing the inspection report of the Chennai Metropolitan Development Authority, depending upon the nature of the deviations at the time of considering their applications for completion certificate and one such recent order was passed in W.P.No.5661 of 2013, dated 20.04.2014. Even in a decision rendered by this Court in W.P.No.2219 of 2012, dated 26.07.2012 and in W.P.No.3848 of 2012, dated 01.08.2012, this Court was pleased to decide against the Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, that in the absence of such provisions under the Act and Distribution Code, they are not justified in making a demand of completion certificate from Chennai Metropolitan Development Authority for providing electricity service connection and even went to the extent of holding "The authoritative pronouncement of this Hon'ble Court cannot be sustained in law" and allowed those writ petitions. Neither the Tamil Nadu Electricity Board nor Chennai Metropolitan Development Authorities have preferred any appeal against such decisions and had effected electricity to those petition premises, without insisting on production of completion certificate / no objection certificate from the Chennai Metropolitan Development Authority. Neither the Tamil Nadu Electricity Board nor Chennai Metropolitan Development Authorities have preferred any appeal against such decisions and had effected electricity to those petition premises, without insisting on production of completion certificate / no objection certificate from the Chennai Metropolitan Development Authority. Even as per the circular of the Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, dated 22.11.2006, all constructions less than 4 floors (ground + three floors) are considered as ordinary building and completion certificate was decided not to be demanded. The same was even given effect to by an order in W.A.No.2029 of 2013, filed by the Tamil Nadu Electricity Board under order dated 03.12.2013. Due to such unjustified demand by the Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, the petitioners are unable to get basic amenity so as to put the building to usage effectively as at present the building is in occupation. Hence, the petitioners entreat the Court for direction to the electricity board to give electricity service connection to their premises. 5. The fourth respondent, viz., the Assistant Divisional Engineer (O & M) has filed a counter statement, on behalf of the respondents 1 to 3. The respondent submits that the petitioners building is granted with approval for construction of ground and second floor industrial building vide permit No. C4327/33 A to D/2008, dated 28.11.2008. However, the petitioners have deviated in construction and therefore, unable to get completion certificate, which is mandatory by virtue of the order of the Hon'ble Division Bench for providing power supply to the constructed building. Even though by office circular dated 22.11.2006, had excluded insistence on production of completion certificate / no objection certificate for effecting service connection with respect of ordinary building, the same is superseded by the letter of the fifth respondent to TANGEDCO vide letter dated 18.03.2013, whereby the same was clarified and insisted upon Completion certificate/ no objection certificate for the buildings like the petitioner's buildings. 6. It is stoutly denied that the subject building is strictly conforming to the sanction plan as stated in para 9 of the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition and in fact there are major violations in the building and therefore, the petitioners are not entitled for service connection for want of completion certificate. 6. It is stoutly denied that the subject building is strictly conforming to the sanction plan as stated in para 9 of the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition and in fact there are major violations in the building and therefore, the petitioners are not entitled for service connection for want of completion certificate. In spite of this, the duty to supply on request under Section 43 of the Electricity Act do not contemplate such a demand of completion certificate / no objection certificate from the fifth respondent, it is insisted upon by this board following the decision of Division Bench in common action group's case. Hence, the respondents 1 to 4 entreat the Court to dismiss the above writ petition. 7. The highly competent counsel, Mr.D.S.Raajasekaran for the petitioners submits that the petitioners have constructed a building at plot in S.No.40/3, 7B1, 7C, Sivaboohtam Village, Karambakkam, Panchayat, Vanagaram, Chennai, as per the sanctioned plan vide permit No.C4327/33 A to D/2008 and file No.C2/1201/2007, dated 28.11.2008 for constructions of ground + 2 floors of industrial building. As per the plan, the building has been constructed. Therefore, the petitioners have approached the fourth respondent in the month of March 2004. Further, as per G.O.Ms.No.112, Energy (B1), dated 05.07.2004, whereby, the Tamil Nadu Electricity Board have been directed not to insist on completion certificate / no objection certificate from the Chennai Metropolitan Development Authority with effect from 10.06.2003. The said G.O. is still in force and operating against the Tamil Nadu Electricity Board. As such, the Tamil Nadu Electricity Board cannot insist the petitioners to produce no objection certificate from the Chennai Metropolitan Development Authority. Further, if any minor deviation is there in the said building, even then the owner of the building is entitled to get electricity service connection. The learned counsel has cited a judgment in W.P.Nos.3847 and 3848 of 2012, wherein, this Court directed the Electricity Board to give electricity service connection without insisting on no objection certificate. The operative portion of the judgment is as follows:- "3. In view of the law laid down by this Court, referred to above, there is no justification with the respondents to deny the electricity and water and sewerage service connection for want of completion / no objection certificates from the respondent No.4 4. Consequently, the writ petitions are allowed. The operative portion of the judgment is as follows:- "3. In view of the law laid down by this Court, referred to above, there is no justification with the respondents to deny the electricity and water and sewerage service connection for want of completion / no objection certificates from the respondent No.4 4. Consequently, the writ petitions are allowed. The writ in the nature of mandamus is issued to the respondents to provide electricity and water and sewerage service connection to the petitioner without insisting on completion certificate / no objection certificate." The very competent counsel also referred another judgment passed in W.P.Nos.5661 and 5662 of 2013, wherein, this Court directed the Tamil Nadu Electricity Board to give new electricity service connection without insisting on completion certificate / no objection certificate. The operative portion of the judgment is as follows:- "7. In view of the above stated position, I am inclined to direct the respondents 1 to 4 in W.P.No.5661 of 2013 to provide electricity service connection to the property in question and direct respondents 1 and 2 in W.P.No.5662 of 2013 to provide water and sewerage connection to the property. The said exercise has to be carried out by them within a period of four weeks from the date, when the petitioners approach the concerned respondents with necessary application form along with the necessary documents. However, it is open to the respondent / CMDA to take action against the petitioners, if there is any deviation in the construction put up by the petitioners." Hence, the highly competent counsel, Mr.D.S.Raajasekaran entreats the Court to allow the above writ petition. 8. The very competent counsel, Mr.G.Vasudevan appearing for the respondents 1 to 4 vehemently argued that G.O.Ms.No.112 Energy (B1), dated 05.07.2004 is only applicable for ordinary building, but in the instant case, the petitioner has constructed ground + 2 floors as industrial building and as such, the Government Order is not applicable to him. Further, there is a major violation in the said building. As such, the planning permit granted by the fifth respondent has been violated by the petitioners. Hence, they are not entitled to get electricity service connection. The completion certificate / no objection certificate is required by law and hence, the highly competent counsel, Mr.G.Vasudevan prays the Court to dismiss the above writ petition. 9. As such, the planning permit granted by the fifth respondent has been violated by the petitioners. Hence, they are not entitled to get electricity service connection. The completion certificate / no objection certificate is required by law and hence, the highly competent counsel, Mr.G.Vasudevan prays the Court to dismiss the above writ petition. 9. The very competent counsel, Mr.A.Kumar, appearing for the fifth respondent submits that the petitioners have obtained sanctioned plan from the fifth respondent dated 28.11.2008 for construction of ground +2 floors of industrial building. The petitioners have not constructed the building as per the sanctioned plan and they have violated the conditions of the building plan since there is a deviation in the said construction. Further, the petitioners ought to have complied with the conditions by providing no objection certificate from the fifth respondent, which is required by law. 10. On considering the facts and circumstances of the case and arguments advanced by the learned counsels on all sides and on perusing the typed-set of papers and also taking into account the judgments cited by the learned counsel for the petitioner in W.P.Nos.3847 and 3848 of 2012, W.P.Nos.5661 and 5662 of 2013, this Court is inclined to allow the above writ petition as the said judgments have become final and is in operation. Hence, this Court directs the respondents 1 to 4 to receive the application of the petitioners, process, consider and accord electricity service connection to the premises at Plot in S.No.40/3, 7B1, 7C, Sivaboohtam Village, Karambakkam, Panchayat, Vanagaram, Chennai, without insisting on production of completion certificate / no objection certificate from the fifth respondent / CMDA. However, it is open to the fifth respondent / CMDA to take action against the petitioners, if there is any violations or deviation in the construction put up by the petitioners. 11. In the result, the above writ petition is allowed with the above observations. There is no order as to costs.