AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
M. Jaichandren, J.—Heard Mr. V. Umapathy, the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioner, as well as Mr. M. Suresh Kumar, the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Respondents.
At this stage of the hearing of the writ petition, the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioner had submitted that it would suffice, if the Petitioner is given electricity service connection to the premises in question, under Rule 27(4) of the Tamil Nadu Electricity Distribution Code, 2004.
The learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Respondents has no objection for providing electricity service connection to the Petitioner''s premises, under Rule 27(4) of the Tamil Nadu Electricity Distribution Code, 2004, subject to his fulfilling all the necessary conditions prescribed therein. He had also submitted that the said connection would be provided subject to the decision of the Division Bench of this Court, in W.A. No. 1898 of 2001.
In view of the submissions made by the learned Counsels appearing on behalf of the Petitioner, as well as the Respondents, the third Respondent is directed to provide temporary electricity service connection to the Petitioner''s premises, under Rule 27(4) of the Tamil Nadu Electricity Distribution Code, 2004, subject to his fulfilling all the necessary conditions prescribed therein, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. However, the electricity service connection granted in favour of the Petitioner would be subject to the decision of the Division Bench of this Court, in the writ appeal, in W.A. No. 1898 of 2001.
Accordingly, the writ petition stands allowed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.