WP/16949/2025 of C.KALPANA Vs THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER on 5 October 2026

ORDER

This Writ Petition has been filed for the following reliefs:- “calling for the entire records connected with the impugned order in Ka. No. 958/ExEngg/Na/Co/Va,Aa/Ko Complaint / A.No. 674 / 2024 , dated 17.03.2025 passed by the 1st Respondent and quash the same and direct the 3rd Respondent to restore the Electricity Connection for Service NO. 027-001- 1048.”

Brief Facts

2. The petitioner would submit that she is running a lathe workshop in the name and style of “AC Machine Works” and earning her livelihood therefrom. The subject property, measuring 1260 sq.ft., situated at No.348, Varadharaja Layout, Avarampalayam Road, Ganapathy, Coimbatore – 641 006, was purchased in the year 2002 by her husband in the name of his first wife, Mrs. Manickem, and registered as Document No.623/2023 on the file of the Sub-Registrar Office, Ganapathy. Thereafter, the petitioner’s husband constructed a ground and first floor building in the subject property out of his own funds, and the petitioner established a lathe workshop therein, investing substantial amounts towards machinery. The workshop has been functioning for nearly 25 years. The petitioner would further submit that she has been maintaining the premises and paying the applicable taxes and electricity charges, and that the GST registration and other statutory registrations relating to the workshop also reflect the subject address.

3. The petitioner would submit that her husband had earlier married Mrs.Manickem and, subsequently, married the petitioner, and that two children were born out of their wedlock. According to the petitioner, the first wife and the petitioner were living together as a joint family until Mrs. Manickem left the matrimonial home on 23.07.2017. A complaint was thereafter lodged by the petitioner’s husband before the police seeking her reunion, pursuant to which CSR No.331/2017 dated 01.08.2017 was issued. In an enquiry before the police, the said Manikem had refused to rejoin and wanted to stay in her parental house.

4. The petitioner would submit that, thereafter, her husband instituted a suit in O.S.No.1184 of 2017 on the file of the I Additional Sub-Court, Coimbatore, seeking partition, permanent injunction and other consequential reliefs in respect of the subject property, and the said suit is pending. During the pendency of the said suit, the said Manickem had illegally executed a sale deed in favour of the 4th respondent, who is the daughter of one Thiruvengadam, by obtaining a false Non-Traceable Certificate, vide Document No.6031/2020 dated 22.10.2020. The petitioner would further submit that criminal proceedings were also initiated in connection with the fabrication of documents and transfer of the property.

5. The petitioner would submit that, while the aforesaid civil dispute was pending, on 05.06.2023, the 4th respondent, along with her husband and others, entered the workshop, threatened the petitioner and her family members and demanded that they vacate the premises. On 06.06.2023, the petitioner’s husband approached the police, where they were directed to vacate the premises and hand over possession to the 4th respondent.

6. The petitioner would further submit that, on 06.06.2023, several police personnel, along with the 4th respondent, her husband and others, entered the workshop, assaulted and threatened the petitioner, her husband and the workers, and forcibly removed them from the premises. It is alleged that the Inspector of Police, Katoor Police Station, thereafter locked the workshop and took custody of the keys without any lawful authority or order of a competent Court. The petitioner would submit that the entire incident was recorded in the CCTV cameras installed in the premises.

7. The petitioner would submit that she thereafter submitted a representation dated 07.06.2023 to the concerned authorities, including the State Human Rights Commission, complaining of the alleged high-handed conduct of the police. Pursuant thereto, the keys of the workshop and residence were returned on 13.06.2023. Thereafter, a counter-complaint was lodged by the 4th respondent in Crime No.189 of 2023 against the petitioner and her family members. The said FIR was challenged before this Court in Crl.O.P.No.16525 of 2023 and was subsequently quashed by order dated 04.04.2025.

8. The petitioner would submit that, thereafter, at the instance of the 4th respondent, the electricity service connection bearing Service Connection No.027-001-1048, which was being utilised for the lathe workshop and residence, was disconnected on 21.06.2023. Despite the representation submitted by the petitioner seeking restoration of the electricity service connection, the same was not restored.

9. The petitioner would further submit that, despite the pendency of the civil proceedings in respect of the subject property and the petitioner being in possession and enjoyment of the premises, the 1st respondent, based on the representation of the 4th respondent, disconnected the electricity service connection without conducting any proper enquiry. The petitioner would submit that the disconnection has caused serious prejudice to her, as the lathe workshop is her principal source of livelihood and several workers are also dependent upon the same. The petitioner is presently constrained to operate the workshop using a generator, thereby incurring substantial additional expenditure.

10. The petitioner would submit that, pursuant to her representations dated 06.02.2025 and 05.03.2025, the 1st respondent passed the impugned order in Ka.No.958/ExEngg/Na/Co/Va.Aa/Ko.Complaint/A.No.674/2024, dated 17.03.2025, refusing to restore the electricity service connection bearing No.027-001-1048 and directing the petitioner to obtain appropriate orders from the competent Court. Challenging the same, the petitioner is before this Court seeking the reliefs stated supra.

11. Heard the learned counsel on either side and perused the records.

12. Admittedly, a suit for partition and permanent injunction is pending before the Civil Court and the parties are already before the Civil Court. The title of the 4th respondent/vendor to the subject property is also the subject matter of the pending civil proceedings.

13. Instead of approaching the Civil Court, the petitioner has approached this Court. This Court, while exercising jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, cannot look into the evidence or adjudicate upon the disputed question of title, as the same falls exclusively within the jurisdiction of the competent Civil Court.

14. In view of the fact that the title to the subject property is under dispute, the impugned order directing the petitioner to obtain a No Objection Certificate from the person in whose name the electricity service connection stands cannot be found fault with.

15. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is dismissed. It is open to the petitioner to work out her remedy by filing an appropriate application before the competent Civil Court. No costs. 05-10-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No SHR

P.T.ASHA J. SHR To

1. The Executive Engineer Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, Coimbatore Distribution Circle, Tatabad, Coimbatore - 12

2. The Assistant Executive Engineer, Tamil Nadu Electricity Generation And Distribution Corporation Coimbatore Distribution Circle, Coimbatore.

3. The Divisional Engineer (electrical) Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, Tatabad, Coimbatore. WP No. 16949 of 2025 05-10-2026