P.Saraswathi vs THE ASSISTANT ENGINEER — WP/18624/2026

Case under Others Section 1. Disposed: Contested--WITHDRAWN DISMISSED on 02nd June 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: HCMA010991422026

Filing Number

WP/73530/2026

Filing Date

22-Apr-2026

Registration No

WP/18624/2026

Registration Date

06-May-2026

Judge

Honourable Mr.Justice Mohammed Shaffiq

Coram

Honourable Mr.Justice Mohammed Shaffiq

Bench Type

Single Bench

Category

Electricity ( 56 )

Judicial Branch

WRITSECTION

Decision Date

02-Jun-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--WITHDRAWN DISMISSED

Last updated 03-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

Others Section 1

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.P.Saraswathi

    Adv. P.Mani, M.Tamil Thendral Arasu

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.THE ASSISTANT ENGINEER

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 02-Jun-2026

    Honourable Mr.Justice Mohammed ShaffiqView PDF

    Case Summary: WP/18624/2026 – P. Saraswathi v. The Assistant Engineer, TANGEDCO P. Saraswathi filed a writ petition under Article 226 seeking a Mandamus to direct TANGEDCO to shift overhead live electricity lines running across her house at Kalaignar Nagar, Namakkal district, at the respondent's cost due to safety concerns. On 02-06-2026, the Madras High Court dismissed the petition as the petitioner's counsel sought and obtained permission to withdraw it. The court granted the petitioner liberty to challenge any future proceedings by which she may be aggrieved through appropriate legal remedies, with no costs imposed. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 02-Jun-2026

    For Admission

    Honourable Mr.Justice Mohammed Shaffiq

  4. 22-Apr-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. WP/18624/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: WP/18624/2026 – P. Saraswathi v. The Assistant Engineer, TANGEDCO P. Saraswathi filed a writ petition under Article 226 seeking a Mandamus to direct TANGEDCO to shift overhead live electricity lines running across her house at Kalaignar Nagar, Namakkal district, at the respondent's cost due to safety concerns. On 02-06-2026, the Madras High Court dismissed the petition as the petitioner's counsel sought and obtained permission to withdraw it. The court granted the petitioner liberty to challenge any future proceedings by which she may be aggrieved through appropriate legal remedies, with no costs imposed. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case