Nune Narasimha Reddy v. the State of Andhra Pradesh
Case brief
What is this about?
The Supreme Court closed a Writ Petition challenging an order sanctioning the rerouting of 33 KV electricity lines. Counsel argued the proposed line did not pass through petitioners' land based on counter-affidavits, making adjudication unnecessary.
What did the court decide?
Writ Petition closed; no order as to costs; pending interlocutory applications stand closed.
What the court decided
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI
WRIT PETITION NO.4723 OF 2023
ORDER:
The present Writ Petition is filed by the petitioners, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking the following relief:
“to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Mandamus declaring the Memo No. CGM/O & M/ EE / DY.EE – 1/AEE/O & M/E Comp.No.294626/22 dated 26.11.2022 sanctioning to Rerouting of 1320 Mtrs 33 KV Tripuranthakam Feeder at location Nos. from 129 to 148 issued by the respondents, as illegal, arbitrary, against the guidelines and in violation of principles of natural justice guaranteed under the Constitution of India, and consequently set aside the Memo No.CGM/O&M/EE/DY.EE1/AEE/O&M/E Comp.No.294626/22 dated 26.11.2022 sanctioning to Re-routing of 1320 Mtrs 33 KV Tripuranthakam Feeder at location Nos.from 129 to 138 and pass such other order or orders……”
- The short grievance of the petitioners herein in the present Writ Petition is that, by virtue of memo dated 26.11.2022, the Superintending Engineer, submitted an estimate proposal for rerouting of 1320 Mtrs 33 KV, Tripurantakam Feeder at location Nos. 129 to 148 thereby now passing through the petitioners’ properties without following rules and without any security causing loss and damages.
2
- Heard Smt. K. Aruna, learned counsel for the petitioners, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Energy department appearing for respondent No.1, Sri V.R.Reddy Kovvuri, learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondent Nos.2 to 6.
Issues for consideration
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the Writ Petition requires adjudication in light of the authorities re-routing the lines through the NSP canal instead of petitioners' properties.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
Petitioners
- respondent
Superintending Engineer
- respondent
Energy Department
- respondent
Respondent Nos.2 to 6
Coram
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
- Court
- Andhra Pradesh HC
- Decided on
- · October
- Registered
- Case no.
- WP/4723/2023
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court