Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2014 DIGILAW 3304 (MAD)

R. Panchavarnam v. District Collector

2014-09-12

B.RAJENDRAN

body2014
Judgment : 1. The prayer in the writ petition is for the issuance of a writ of mandamus to direct the second respondent to provide independent domestic electricity service connection to the petitioners without insisting No Objection Certificate from the Revenue Department and by accepting the Undertaking Bond contemplated under Regulation 27 of Tamil Nadu Electricity Distribution Code and by applying relevant rules thereupon within a time frame limit as fixed by this Court. 2. It is the case of the petitioners that they are residing in Government Poramboke lands for more than 50 years and more number of members are engaged in laundry work or as service renderers. They have put up huts in the working place. Their children are studying in Schools and Colleges, but, they do not have electricity connection. When they have made applications to the respondents to provide electricity supply, the Superintending Engineer, Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, has directed them to obtain “No Objection Certificate” from the District Collector, Tiruvannamalai District, the first respondent herein. Therefore, they made representations to the first respondent for grant of “No Objection Certificate”. Subsequently, they also made representations to the Superintending Engineer, to provide electricity connection. But, the Superintending Engineer has not considered the said request. Hence, the present writ petition. 3. On the above pleadings, learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are residing in Tiruvannamalai District, and that they have been issued with Ration Cards by the Civil Supplies Corporation. Attention of this Court was also invited to the Voters' I.D., issued by the Election Commission of India, to prove that the petitioners are residing in Tiruvannamalai District. 4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would further bring to the notice of this Court that in identical circumstances, eleven petitioners have filed W.P.No.17608 of 2013 before this Court and this Court by order dated 27.09.2013, directed the respondents to pass suitable orders and give electricity supply connection to the petitioners therein within four weeks from receipt of the applications from the petitioners. Following the same, this Court also in W.P.No.6540 of 2014 and etc. batch vide order dated 09.09.2014 disposed of the writ petition directing the respondents to provide electricity service connection to the petitioners. Accordingly, he would pray for a similar direction in this writ petition also. 5. Following the same, this Court also in W.P.No.6540 of 2014 and etc. batch vide order dated 09.09.2014 disposed of the writ petition directing the respondents to provide electricity service connection to the petitioners. Accordingly, he would pray for a similar direction in this writ petition also. 5. Learned Government Advocate appearing on behalf of the first respondent as well as the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the Tamil Nadu Electricity Board have no objection for passing a similar order in this writ petition. 6. Heard both sides. 7. This Court in W.P.No.6540 of 2014 and etc. batch vide order dated 09.09.2014 has passed the following order: "16. In all these cases, the petitioners seek for electricity service connection only on the ground that they have been in possession of Government Poramboke Lands for quite number of years. In the judgment in W.P.No.17608 of 2013, filed by eleven petitioners, the learned Single Judge of this Court has elaborately and detailedly discussed the issue and by order dated 27.09.2013, directed the respondents to pass suitable orders and to give electricity supply connection. Both learned counsel appearing for the petitioners as well as respondents agreed that the matter in issue is squarely covered by the order dated 27.09.2013. 17. At this juncture, it is relevant to extract the relevant portion of the order passed by this Court in W.P.No. 17608 of 2013, dated 27.09.2013, which reads as under:- “80. A Writ of Mandamus, can be issued by the court, in its discretion, for which, it must be shown that, there is a non discretionary legal duty upon the authority against whom, the relief is sought for and that the person approaching the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, has to prove that he has a legal right to be enforced against the authority, for the failure of performance of a legal or statutory duty, by the authority against whom, the relief is sought for. 81. Removal of encroachment is different, from entitlement to seek for electricity supply. The law applicable for removal of encroachment and the mandatory duty to provide electricity, under the electricity law, are different and distinct. 81. Removal of encroachment is different, from entitlement to seek for electricity supply. The law applicable for removal of encroachment and the mandatory duty to provide electricity, under the electricity law, are different and distinct. The delegated legislation, taking note of occupation of those in poromboke lands, has recognised them as "occupiers", entitled to seek for electricity supply, and in such circumstances, while removal of encroachment can be done, as per the procedure under the Encroachment Laws, supply of electricity cannot be denied to the "occupier" of poromboke lands. When statutory provisions do not differentiate a owner and occupier for the use or intended to use, electricity supply even by a person in occupation of poromboke lands, denial of electricity supply by the respondents, to the petitioners, who are in occupation, at least from 2005 onwards, amounts to discrimination and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. 82. From the materials on record, it could be deduced that atleast from 2005 onwards, the petitioners are residing, in and around Girivalam path, without electricity supply. Food, Shelter and clothing are the basic amenities for living. Water is indispensable. Though the District Administration and Commissioner, Tiruvannamalai Municipality, have claimed that the petitioners are encroachers, in and around Girivala Pathai, they cannot be expected to live in darkness. Even an occupant in a Government poromboke land, is entitled to seek for a decent living with basic amenities, like water, food, shelter and clothing. Electricity is indispensable. In the wake of the statutory provisions, it would be inappropriate to contend that the petitioners are not entitled to electricity supply. As stated supra, though the Municipality and District Administration, in the year 2005, have decided to remove the encroachments, “much water has flown under the bridge” and things have changed in the year 2008, when the Committee has decided to file a modification affidavit to regularise their occupation, ie., to assign house site pattas, in terms of Government Orders. 83. As between the owner and an intending consumer, who is not the owner of the premises, it is suffice that the intending consumer, produces a consent letter in Form 5 of Annexure III of the Distribution Code from the owner of the premises for availing supply. 83. As between the owner and an intending consumer, who is not the owner of the premises, it is suffice that the intending consumer, produces a consent letter in Form 5 of Annexure III of the Distribution Code from the owner of the premises for availing supply. If the owner is not available or refuses to give consent letter, the intending consumer shall produce proof of his/her being in lawful occupation of the premises and also execute an indemnity bond in Form 6 of the Annexure III of the code indemnifying the licensee against any loss on account of disputes arising out off effecting service connection to the occupant and acceptance to pay security deposit twice the normal rate. 84. In the case of those, who reside in Poromboke lands, to produce a "No Objection Certificate from the Officers, not below the rank of Deputy Tahsildar and if such certificate is not produced, an undertaking is sufficient. In the light of the statutory provisions and for all the reasons, stated supra, this Court is of the view that the petitioners are entitled to seek for electricity service connection. 85. The issue as to whether the petitioners are entitled to pattas, in the places, where they now reside, cannot be adjudicated in this writ petition. 86. Before parting with the case, it is my humble view that when lot of devotees visit the temple, and go around the Girivalam Path, hoping that 'God' would fulfil their aspirations, answer their prayers, pardon them, for their sins and wrong doings, and offer their prayers, with things, starting from flowers to Gold, why should the Committee, hopefully comprising of God fearing persons, should deny them even 'basic lighting', in the families of poor laundry workers, solely, on the ground that they do not own a place for living. At this juncture, this Court is reminded of a saying, ????????? When a mechanism legally devised is available in the Code framed under the Electricity Act and admittedly, when they are residing in the place, from 2005 onwards, this Court is of the view that there is a failure on the part to discharge their statutory duties. 87. It is the fundamental duty of the respondents to show compassion to those who are living in huts and tenements for long number of years, taking into consideration their socio-economic disabilities, without electricity supply for many years. 87. It is the fundamental duty of the respondents to show compassion to those who are living in huts and tenements for long number of years, taking into consideration their socio-economic disabilities, without electricity supply for many years. Preamble to the Constitution of India guarantees right of every person to justice, social, economic and political. When socio and economic justice is the mandate of the Constitution of India, it is a traversity of justice to deny electricity to the petitioners. Income is one of the sources for achieving an egalitarian society and it is the fundamental right to decent living. Providing electricity to the poor, subject to the satisfying conditions, as per the electricity laws, would reduce the economic imbalance and help the under privileged. The authorities should be pragmatic and realistic to the constitutional goals. The weaker sections and under privileged do not crave, in their heart, for power in hierarchical positions, they only want electric power to have "lighting" in their house. Hut dwellers cannot expect and afford luxury. But for them, it is only a basic amenity. Electricity supply should, not only be extended to pattadars or the owners of lands, but it should also be extended to the poor and the needy, who live in government poromboke lands, when they substantiate occupation, for a considerable period. 88. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the respondents are directed to consider the case of the petitioners and provide electricity connection, based on their applications, along with the necessary undertaking and Indemnity Bond, to be submitted by them. Electricity supply to be granted, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of the applications and other requirements. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is also closed.” 18. Further, learned counsel for the petitioners also undertook before this Court that the petitioners are poor people and they are residing in Tiruvannamalai District only to eke out their livelihood and they will not use the service connection for commercial purpose, they will not use the service connection for any other shops or they will not let out the house to shops and they will not let out the service connection to anyone in connection with festivity. They also specifically undertook that the service connection will be utilised only for the residential purpose. The said undertaking is recorded. 19. They also specifically undertook that the service connection will be utilised only for the residential purpose. The said undertaking is recorded. 19. Taking into consideration of the fact that the matter in issue is squarely covered by the judgment cited supra, following the same as well as recording the undertaking given by the learned counsel for the petitioners, all these Writ Petitions are allowed and insofar as W.P.Nos. 12340 of 2014 and W.P.Nos. 11976 to 11986 of 2014 are concerned, the impugned orders dated 23.12.2013 are set aside and the respondents are directed to consider the case of the petitioners and provide electricity connection, based on their applications, along with the necessary undertaking and Indemnity Bond, to be submitted by them. Electricity supply to be granted, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of the applications and fulfilment of other requirements as contemplated under the Act. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed. No costs. " 8. In view of the same, this writ petition is also disposed of on the above lines directing the respondents to consider the case of the petitioners and provide electricity connection, based on their applications, along with the necessary undertaking and Indemnity Bond, to be submitted by them. Electricity supply to be granted, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of the applications and fulfilment of other requirements as contemplated under the Act. No costs.