Disposed

Vantapalli Srinivas, v. The Eastern Power Distribution Company Limited, A.P

Andhra Pradesh HC18 Sept 2024WP/18245/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought mandamus restraining grant of an electricity service connection over land in Survey No.7/2 where title was disputed and a suit (O.S. No.17 of 2018) was pending. The court disposed of the writ petition directing respondents 4 to 6 to consider the petitioner's representation dated 23.07.2024 after hearing all parties, within three weeks.

What the court decided

AI extract

Vantapalli Srinivas, Vs The Eastern Power… — Property and Title | Andhra Pradesh HC (2024)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAV^^^ o (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶3

o<br>o
(Special Original Jurisdiction) Vi ;
4
THURSDAY, THE NINETEENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER|i -0
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR / ^ o

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

TKE honourable SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NINIMA,GADDA WRIT PFTITION NO: 18245 OF 2024 ,

¶6

Between:

¶7

S/o Veera Raghavulu, Aged 55 Years, R/o Street no.^6, Vantapalli Srinivas Old Bhandan Bank Building Aswaraopeta (V) and (M), Bhadradri Kothagudem District, TeJ^tigana State.

¶8

...PETITIONER

¶9

AND

¶10

The Eastern Power Distribution Company Limited, A.P, Rep. by its Chairman and Managing Director, Visakhapatnam.

¶11

The Chief General Manager, APEPDCL, Visakhapatnam.

¶12

The Superintendent Engineer, APEPDCL, Eluru.

¶13

The Divisional Engineer, Jangareddygudem, Eluru^District.

¶14

The Executive Engineer (Operation), A.P.E.P.D.C.L, Jeelugumalli, Elluru District.

¶15

The Deputy Executive Engineer (Operations), A.P.E.P.D.C.L., Jeelugumalli, Elluru District.

¶16

Modiyam Srinivasa Rao, W/o Gangaraju, aged 45 years, R/o D.No.^{1-^}

¶17

¶18

Rajanagaram Village, Buttayagudem Mandal, Eluru District.

¶19

...RESPONDENTS

¶20

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying^thatin the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith,^{theHighCourtmay} direction, more particularly, one in the be pleased to issue a writ, order or nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring the action of the respondent land authorities in taking steps for issuing the electricity in the petitioner's admeasuring an extent of ac. 10.96 cts in sy.no.7/2,^{JeelugumilliVillage}

¶21

Jeelugumilli Mandal, Eluru District basing upon application submitted by the 77th , respondent as illegal, arbitrary and consequently direct the respondent authorities not to take any steps in issuing the electricity connection to the petitioners land admeasuring an extent of ac. 10.96 cts in sy.no.7/2. Jeelugumilli Village, Jeelugumilli Mandal Eluru District and consequently direct the 2nd respondent to initiate necessary action against the 5 and 6^^ respondents for ^satisfying the misdeeds of the 7‘^ respondent.

¶22

lA NO: 1 OF 2024

¶23

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to stop all further proceedings m issuing electricity connection to the petitioner land admeasuring an extent of ac. 10.96 cts in sy.no.7/2, Jeelugumilli Village, Jeeluguiprfli Mandal, Eluru District.

¶24

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI PONNADA SREE WAS

¶25

Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 to 6:SRI METTA CHANDRASEKHAR

¶26

RAO, SC FOR APEPDCL

¶27

Counsel for the Respondent No.7: NONE APPEARED The Court made the following: ORDER

APHC010343362024

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI

¶32

[3329]

¶33

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶34

THURSDAY. THE NINETEENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

¶35

PRESENT

¶36

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA

¶37

WRIT PETITION NO: 18245/2024

¶38

Between:

¶39

Vantapalli Srinivas, ...PETITIONER

¶40

AND

¶41

The Eastern Power Distribution Company ...RESPONDENT(S) Limited A.P. and Others

¶42

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶43

PONNADA SREE VYAS

¶44

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶45

METTA CHANDRASEKHAR RAO

¶46

The Court made the following ORDER:

¶47

Heard learned counsel for petitioner and learned standing

¶48

counsel representing on behalf of the respondents and^withtheir

¶49

consent, this writ petition is disposed of at the admission stage.

¶50

The petitioner seeks writ of mandamus to declare the action of the respondent authorities in taking steps for issuing the electricity service connection in the petitioner’s land admeasuring

¶51

¶52

an extent of Acres 11.96 cents situated in Survey No.7/2 of Jeelugumilii Village and Mandal Eluru District, basing upon the application submitted by the respondent as illegal and arbitrary and for a consequential direction.

¶53

The case of the petitioner herein is that he is the absolute owner and possessor of land admeasuring an extent of Acres 11.96 cents situated in Survey No.7/2 of Ramanapalem Village, Jeelugumilii Mandal and he also possessed lands admeasuring Acres 5.65 cents in Survey No.30/2 and Acres 1.29 cents in Survey No.97/2 of Jeelugumilii Village and Mandal, Eluru District. According to the petitioner, there is a dispute between the petitioner and T'" respondent in respect of title as well as possession of the property admeasuring an extent of Acres 11.96 cents situated in Survey No.7/2 of Ramanapalem Village, Jeelugumilii Mandal, Eluru District, for which, the petitioner filed suit in O.S. No.17 of 2018 on the file of Agent to Government (I.T.D.A.), Eluru, West Godavari District and the same is pending

¶54

consideration. The learned counsel for petitioner submits that pending adjudication of the matter before the concerned court, the 7th respondent herein submitted an application seeking electricity service connection in the subject property. Pursuant to

¶55

¶56

such application, respondents herein had visited the subject property for granting electricity service connection. In view of the same the petitioner submitted several representations of^which the latest one is dated 23.07.2024 to the respondent^Nos.5and6 such connection since the herein requesting not to grant any petitioner is claiming ownership and possession over^thesubject property. He further submitted that without considering the said representation, the respondent Nos.4 to 6 cannot be^permittedto grant any such electricity service connection to the 7'^ respondent. Hence, the writ petition.

¶57

;

¶58

On the other hand, learned standing counsel appearing^for the respondent Nos.2 to 6 submits that admittedly there is a dispute between the petitioner and the 7*^ respondent^regarding the subject property as mentioned above and the petitioner herein also filed suit in O.S. No.17 of 2018 for declaration^{oftitleaswell} as for issuance of permanent injunction against the 7‘h respondent and others and the same is pending consideration. She further submits that in view of the representation^submitted would be considered and it can be by the petitioner, the same disposed of in accordance with law.

¶59

¶60

¶61

Having regard to the submissions made by the learned counsel for petitioner as well as learned standing^{counselforthe} respondents, this Court is of the considered view that^thepresent writ petition can be disposed of directing the respondent Nos. 4 to 6 herein to consider the representation of the^petitionerby fixing some time frame.

¶62

the 6. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of directing respondent Nos.4 to 6 to consider the representation dated 23.07.2024 submitted by the petitioner and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, after providing an opportunity^of hearing to the petitioner as well as the 7**^ respondent^andother stakeholders, if any, within a period of three weeks^fromthedate of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs.

¶63

As a sequel. miscellaneous petitions pending consideration, if any, in this case shall stand closed.

¶64

30,. K. KAS1RA0_ achari //TRUE COPY// ASS\STAN-r|REGISTRAK Tcer SECT

¶65

To,

¶66

Director, Eastern Power Distribution

¶67

1. The Chairman and Managing Company Limited A.P, Visakhapatnam.

¶68

1. The Chief General Manager, APEPDCL, Visakhapatnam. 3. The Superintendent Engineer, APEPDCL, Eluru. 4 The Divisional Engineer, Jangareddygudem, Eluru District. 5. The Executive Engineer (Operation), A.P.E.P.D.C.L.,^{Jeelugumalli,}

¶69

Elluru District.

¶70

The Deputy Executive Engineer (Operations), A.P.E.P.D.C.L., Jeelugumalli, Eluru District.

¶71

One CC to Sri Ponnada Sree Vyas, Advocate [OPUC] 8 One CC to Sri Metta Chandrasekhar Rao, SC for APEPDCL[OPUC]

¶72

Three CD Copies.

ssb

^7^

HIGH COURT

DATED: 19/09/2024

ORDER

WP.No.18245 of 2024

/ fcia: I'i
O 0 5 OCT 202'! m?,
cs//
Current Seczion .
‘V
■•■.TTC’

¶80

disposing of the w.p. without costs

Vantapalli Srinivas, v. The Eastern Power Distribution Company Limited, A.P

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Vantapalli Srinivas, v. The Eastern Power Distribution Company Limited, A.P

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mandali Lakshamana Rao, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

M/s. M.D. Sobjee, Automobile Engineering Works Vs Visakhapatnam Port Trust

Pereira English Noble School Vs the Regional Provident Fund

M/s. V.S.S. Constructions, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Kcp Nutrritious Pvt. Ltd. Vs State of Andhra Pradesh

N Suresh Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh