01Facts
The petitioner sought a writ of mandamus restraining respondents 1–5 from handing over College land in specified survey fields to TANGEDCO for an electricity substation, relying on an Alumni Association representation dated 12 January 2026.
p. 2The petitioner contended that the substation would threaten the safety of approximately 150 students at the Government College of Arts and Crafts and impede the College’s future expansion.
p. 3The State submitted that the College occupied approximately 12 acres, that only 90 cents was required, and that alternative sites were unsuitable because they were agricultural lands or water bodies.
pp. 3–4The Court considered the petition under Article 226 of the Constitution.
p. 602Issues
i.1. Whether the respondents should be restrained from using 90 cents of College land to establish an electricity substation on the grounds that it would endanger students and impair the College’s future expansion.
pp. 2–3, 5ii.2. Whether the proposed substation could proceed subject to safeguards protecting students, staff and other College occupants.
p. 603Law Applied
The Court considered its jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution and the requirement that a proposed electricity substation within an educational institution be established with necessary safety precautions and protective measures, in accordance with applicable safety standards and regulations.
p. 6, 8The judgment cites no specific statute or precedent governing the land’s use or the substation’s establishment.
04Reasoning
The Court weighed the safety concerns against the need for essential electricity infrastructure and the reported difficulty of identifying a suitable alternative site.
p. 5It noted that the proposed use involved only 90 cents of the College’s approximately 12 acres, leaving about 11 acres for future development, and therefore rejected the claim that the project would necessarily deprive the College of land needed for expansion.
pp. 5–6However, because the substation would be within an educational institution, the Court treated the safety of students, staff and other occupants as paramount and required adequate safeguards.
p. 605Holding
The Court dismissed the writ petition, finding no ground for interference under Article 226.
p. 6It directed the official respondents to establish the substation only after taking all necessary and adequate safety measures in accordance with applicable safety standards and regulations, to protect students, teaching staff and other persons using the College premises.
p. 6No order as to costs was made.
p. 6Original Court PDF
S.Senthilkumar,vsThe Director of Art and Culture,
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in
