Clause 27(2) under provision of essential services act.
S.R.Venkatraman
(Querist) 05 May 2013
This query is : Open
In a judgement to a writ filed by the trespassers/Petitioner against myself and the Asst.Engineer-T.N.E.B-Respondents at the Madras High Court, for issue of electricity in their name(in my survey number) to which I had objected and also sent a legal notice to the Asst.Engineer-T.N.E.B not to grant any permission for electrical connection to the trespassers/petitioner in my land survey number which they have illegally occupied and also illegally constructed a small shed with the help of local police. The petitioner/Trespassers had illegally registered the sale deed using bogus 'patta' and other forged documents.
While the Judge had observed that the petitioner/trespasser has not established his legal rights over the property due to the registration of bogus documents, he has instructed the Asst.Engineer-T.N.E.B to use discretion in granting a 'temporary' electrical connection to the trespassers/petitioner in my land survey number under section 27(2) of provision of essential services which he has observed a 'Basic Civic Right' of an individual and that such right should not be denied.
This is highly ridiculous and mockery of interpretation of a law under Indian judicial system as it is very clear that the petitioner/trespasser does not hold any rights over the property or has any clear title to the property - when this is the case where is the question of denial of provision of essential services under section 27(2) under provision of essential services act??
It is most disheartening to note the deliberate or otherwise error on the part of the judge in coming to conclusions without proper verification of land document of both the sides.
I now fear, whether my right over the property will be ultimately denied to me due to the fact that the opposite side is using money and influence to their benefit and that they may claim 'possession' over my land.
I would like to know whether I will be seriously affected by such a ruling? or
Whether this ruling is to my advantage?
