Allowed

R. Parvathamma v. Chief Engineer

Karnataka HC27 Mar 2023WP/3157/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ petition sought to quash an order rejecting power supply sanction due to pending injunctions. The Court allowed the petition, quashed the impugned order, and directed respondents to grant connection within two weeks, subject to regulatory requirements.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition allowed. Impugned order quashed. Respondents directed to grant power connection within two weeks, subject to regulatory requirements.

R. Parvathamma Vs Chief Engineer — Service and Employment | Karnataka HC (2023)

¶1

¶2

WP No. 3157 of 2023

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 27^TH DAY OF MARCH, 2023 BEFORE

¶4

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR

¶5

WRIT PETITION NO. 3157 OF 2023 (GM-KEB)

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

R. PARVATHAMMA W/O SHIVALINGAIAH AGED 42 YEARS, R/A 17/9/-3, 20TH CROSS, 6TH MAIN, BHUVANESHWARI NAGAR, BENGALURU - 560 023

¶8

… PETITIONER

¶9

(BY SRI. NARENDRA GOWDA., ADVOCATE)

¶10

AND:

¶11

CHIEF ENGINEER BANGALORE METORPOLITAN CITY BMA2, NORTH ZONE BANGALORE - 560 009.

¶12

Digitally signed by R HEMALATHA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶13

ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER N-2, SUB-DIVISION, BENGALURU MAHANAGARA PALIKE SUB-DIVISION, BESCOM, BENGALURU - 560 001.

¶14

… RESPONDENTS

¶15

(BY SRI. T.S. VENKATESH, ADVOCATE)

¶16

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 24/02/2022 PASSED BY THE R-1 MADE IN NO.MUE(V)/BMAKSHEDAVA/AE/SAKAE-2/2122/6292-94 VIDE ANNEXURE-A AND ETC.

¶17

¶18

WP No. 3157 of 2023

¶19

THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶20

ORDER

¶21

Heard learned Counsel for the Petitioner.

¶22

Petitioner's request for sanctioning power supply was rejected on the ground that there is no final order passed on the application for grant of temporary injunction in O.S.No.1741/2020.

¶23

Petitioner has produced copy of the order dated 01.06.2022 passed by the XXXV Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru, by which defendants therein are restrained from interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the plaintiff (petitioner herein) over the suit property and also from dispossessing the plaintiff from suit property pending disposal of the suit.

¶24

In view of the said order, the request of the petitioner for sanctioning power supply requires to be reconsidered. Accordingly, I pass the following:

¶25

ORDER

¶26

(i) Writ petition is allowed.

¶27

¶28

WP No. 3157 of 2023

¶29

(ii) The impugned order dated 24.02.2022 passed by

¶30

respondent No.1 is hereby quashed.

¶31

(iii) Respondents are hereby directed to grant power connection to the petitioner's premises, within two weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order, subject to the petitioner satisfying the requirements of existing Regulations for sanctioning power supply.

¶32

Sd/JUDGE

¶33

R. Parvathamma v. Chief Engineer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

R. Parvathamma v. Chief Engineer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kamalesh Reddy Vs the Divisional Controller

Sri. Pradeep Kumar. H. S. Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri B Thimmegowda Vs the Chief Traffic Manager

Sri. Chamundeswari Sugars Limited Vs the Assistant Labour Commissioner

Sri. Chamundeswari Sugars Limited Vs the Assistant Labour Commissioner

Sri. Chamundeswari Sugars Limited Vs the Assistant Labour Commissioner