Allowed

Mr Azamthullah a v. Bescom Electricity Supply Co. Ltd.

Karnataka HC14 Aug 2024WP/13410/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners sought to quash an endorsement denying electricity connection due to an interim order in a related matter concerning construction compliance. The court held that since the related writ petition was disposed of and construction complied with plans, denial was unjustified.

What did the court decide?

Quashed the endorsement denying supply; directed Respondent No.2 to continue permanent/temporary power connection and consider permanent sanction application within four weeks.

Mr Azamthullah a Vs Bescom Electricity Supply Co… — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

1 - NC: 2024:KHC:32961 WP No. 13410 of 2023

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 14^TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2024 BEFORE

¶4

THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA

¶5

WRIT PETITION NO.13410 OF 2023 (GM-KEB)

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

MR. AZMATHULLAH .A S/O. MR. ARIFULLA AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS,

¶8

MRS. RUMANA BEGUM, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, D/O. MR. ARIFULLA, BOTH ARE R/AT NO.6/1,

¶9

CLARKE ROAD, WARD NO.60, SAGAYAPURAM, RICHARDS TOWN, BANGALORE – 560 005. ... PETITIONERS

¶10

(BY SRI KALYAN R., ADVOCATE)

¶11

AND:

¶12

Digitally signed by SHYAMALA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶13

BESCOM ELECTRICITY SUPPLY CO. LTD. WHOLLY OWNED BY THE GOVT. OF KARNATAKA K.G. ROAD, BENGALURU – 01, REPTD. BY MANAGING DIRECTOR.

¶14

THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER (ELEC.) E5 SUB DIVISION, LAZOR ROAD, COOKE TOWN, BENGALURU – 05. ... RESPONDENTS

¶15

(BY SMT. SWAMINI G. MOHANAMBAL, ADVOCATE (VK FILED FOR R2))

¶16

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ENDORSEMENT DATED 23/06/2023 BEARING NO. AEE/E5/AE(T)/2023-24/588-90 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.2 HEREIN AS PER ANNEXURE-A TO THE WRIT PETITION AND CONSEQUENTLY ISSUE A WRIT OF MANDAMUS OR ANY OTHER WRIT OR DIRECTION BY DIRECTING THE RESPONDENTS TO PROVIDE ELECTRICITY CONNECTION TO THE PETITIONERS RESIDENTIAL HOUSE SITUATED AT NO.6/1, CLARKE ROAD, RICHARDS TOWN, BENGALURU-05.

¶17

2 - NC: 2024:KHC:32961 WP No. 13410 of 2023

¶18

THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA

¶19

ORAL ORDER

¶20

Heard Sri Kalyan R., learned counsel for the petitioners and Smt. Swamini G. Mohanambal, learned counsel for respondent No.2.

¶21

Petitioners are seeking to quash the endorsement dated 23.06.2023 issued by respondent No.2.

¶22

One Writ Petition No.24597/2021 was preferred by Richards Town Residents’ Association seeking directions against Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike to take necessary steps to ensure that the construction put up in the schedule property is strictly in compliance with the sanctioned plan dated 17.10.2020. The petitioners were arrayed as respondent Nos.5 and 6 in the said petition. In the said writ petition, an interim order was granted on 19.01.2022, which reads as under:

¶23

3 - NC: 2024:KHC:32961 WP No. 13410 of 2023

¶24

“Till the disposal of the appeal before the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal in Appeal No.112 of 2022, respondent Nos.2, 3 and 4 are directed not to provide permanent electricity connection and water supply to the building constructed by respondent Nos.5 and 6 in the property bearing No.6/1, Clarks Road, ward No.60, Sagayapuram, Bengaluru. If permanent electricity and water supply connection is already provided, the concerned respondents shall take immediate action to discontinue the services.

¶25

However, the respondent Nos.5 and 6 are entitled to temporary electricity connection only but they shall not put up further construction. Respondent No.2 is directed to ensure that no further, construction is put up by respondent Nos.5 and 6.”

¶26

(emphasis supplied)

¶27

Writ petition came to be disposed of by the order dated 04.01.2023, observing that since respondent Nos.1 and 2 have already taken steps to see that the construction is in accordance with the sanctioned plan and as their action is challenged before the Karnataka

¶28

4 - NC: 2024:KHC:32961 WP No. 13410 of 2023

¶29

Appellate Tribunal, in that view of the matter, the question of issuing mandamus to respondent Nos.1 and 2 would

¶30

not arise and on the outcome of the said appeal, respondent Nos.1 and 2 – BBMP to take appropriate action.

¶31

Perusal of the impugned endorsement at Annexure-A indicates that the basis of refusal of permanent/temporary power supply by respondent Nos.1 and 2 was in light of the direction given in W.P.No.24597/2021 by way of an interim order. The writ petition No.24597/2021 having been disposed of, the interim order has culminated into a final order, and there

¶32

is no basis for the respondent authorities to deny the permanent/temporary power supply. If the construction is not in accordance with the sanctioned plan, it is for the authorities to take action and admittedly, the action of the BBMP authorities is in challenge before the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal, the respondents herein cannot deny the supply of electricity, which is a basic fundamental right

¶33

¶34

NC: 2024:KHC:32961 WP No. 13410 of 2023

¶35

for existence and protected under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. In the circumstances, this Court passed the following:

¶36

ORDER

¶37

(i) Writ petition is allowed.

¶38

(ii) The impugned endorsement at Annexure-A is quashed.

¶39

(ii) Respondent No.2 is directed to continue with the permanent/temporary power connection to the petitioners.

¶40

(iii) The application filed by the petitioners for sanction of permanent connection to be considered by the respondents in accordance with law, till such time, the temporary connection to be continued.

¶41

(iv) The application of the petitioners for sanction of permanent power supply shall be considered within four weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of this order.

¶42

Sd/(K.S. HEMALEKHA) JUDGE

¶43

¶44

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 31

Mr Azamthullah a v. Bescom Electricity Supply Co. Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mr Azamthullah a v. Bescom Electricity Supply Co. Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shri Mahadevaiah Vs New Cambridge School

M/S Volvo Buses India Pvt. Ltd. Vs the Deputy Labour Commissioner

Sri. Mohammed Niaz Rashid Vs Smt. L. Susheela

Sri M Dhananjaya Reddy Vs State of Karnataka

Sri P B Hemachandra Vs Dr Kamath B N N

Mahalinga Devadiga Vs Susheela @ Susheela Madhyastha