Disposed

Smt K G Leelavathi v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC19 Dec 2024WP/34448/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Karnataka disposed of a writ petition filed for quashing a demand notice and directing free electricity supply. The Court sub-judice treated the notice as a show-cause notice, directed the authority to provide a personal hearing, and stayed disconnection pending the reply.

What did the court decide?

The notice is treated as a show cause notice; the petitioner is granted liberty to file objections within four weeks, and the authority is directed to provide an opportunity of personal hearing before

Smt K G Leelavathi Vs the State of Karnataka — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

NC: 2024:KHC:52508 WP No. 34448 of 2024

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 19^TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2024

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI MULIMANI WRIT PETITION NO. 34448 OF 2024 (GM-KEB)

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

SMT. K.G.LEELAVATHI W/O. LATE. K.M.GANESH, AGED ABOUT 76 YEARS, REPRESENTED BY HER GPA HOLDER, SRI K.G.ROY, S/O. LATE. K.M.GANESH, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, RESIDING AT ANUGHATTA VILLAGE, AREHALLI HOBLI, BELUR TALUK, HASSAN DISTRICT-573 101.

¶8

…PETITIONER

¶9

(BY DR. PRAJWAL ARADHYA., ADVOCATE FOR SRI.S.KALYAN BASAVARAJ., ADVOCATE)

¶10

AND:

¶11

Digitally signed by PREMCHANDRA M R Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶12

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY, BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, VIKAS SOUDHA, DR.AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU-560 001.

¶13

KARNATAKA ELECTRICITY REGULATORY COMMISSION, NO.16, C-1, MILLERS TANK BUND ROAD, YELLAPPA GARDEN, BED AREA, VASANTH NAGAR, BENGALURU-560 052. REPRESENTED BY ITS COMMISIONER.

¶14

¶15

NC: 2024:KHC:52508 WP No. 34448 of 2024

¶16

THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER (V), CHAMUNDESHWARI ELECTRICITY SUPPLY COMPANY LTD., WORK AND CARE SUB-DIVISION, BELURU-573 115.

¶17

COFFEE BOARD, NO.1 DR.AMBEDKAR ROAD, OPP.VISHVESHVARAIAH TOWER, AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, VASANTH NAGAR, BENGALURU-560 001. REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN.

¶18

…RESPONDENTS

¶19

(BY SRI. MANJUNATHA RAYAPPA., AGA FOR R1; SRI. H.V.DEVARAJU., ADVOCATE FOR R3; R2 & 4-DISPENSED WITH V/O DATED: 19.02.2024)

¶20

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, SEEKING CERTAIN RELIEFS.

¶21

THIS WRIT PETITION IS LISTED FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, AN ORDER IS MADE AS UNDER:

¶22

ORAL ORDER

¶23

Dr.Prajwal Aradhya., counsel on behalf of Sri.S.Kalyan Basavaraj., for the petitioner and Sri.H.V.Devaraju., counsel for respondent No.3 have appeared in person.

¶24

The captioned Writ Petition is filed seeking following

¶25

reliefs:

¶26

(a) Issue a Writ of Certiorari or any other

¶27

Writ or order quashing the demand notice bearing

¶28

3 - NC: 2024:KHC:52508 WP No. 34448 of 2024

¶29

PÀæ.¸ÀA:¸ÀPÁEA(«)/»¸À/¨ÉÃ/IP(LT4C)/2021-22/:2450 dated

¶30

10.01.2022 issued by respondent No.3 vide Annexure-F.

¶31

(b) Issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other Writ or order directing the respondents 1, 2 and 3 to extend the benefit of free electricity supply to their IP sets up to 10 H.P. and below 10 H.P. in terms of the order passed by the Government of Karnataka bearing No.EN 55 PSR 2008, Bengaluru dated:04.09.2008 vide Annexure-C.

¶32

Counsel for the respective parties urged several

¶33

contentions. Heard the arguments and perused the Writ papers with care.

¶34

Counsel Sri.H.V.Devaraju., on instructions submits that the notice may be treated as a show cause notice and the petitioner may reply/ file objections to the notice.

¶35

Counsel for the petitioner submits that an appropriate order may be passed.

¶36

¶37

NC: 2024:KHC:52508 WP No. 34448 of 2024

¶38

The oral submission made by counsel for the respective parties is placed on record.

¶39

The Notice at Annexure-F dated 10.01.2022 is treated as a show cause notice and the petitioner is at a liberty to reply/ file objections to the show cause notice to the third respondent within four weeks from the receipt of certified copy of this order. The authority concerned should give an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner. It is made clear that till the consideration of the reply/ objections, the CESCOM authority shall not precipitate the matter for the disconnection of the power connection. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of .

¶40

This Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case.

¶41

Sd/(JYOTI MULIMANI) JUDGE

¶42

MRP List No.: 1 Sl No.: 7

Smt K G Leelavathi v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt K G Leelavathi v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

The Executive Engineer (Ele) Vs Smt. Gangamma

M/S Tool Tech Vs Bengaluru Electricity Supply Company Limited

Sri M Yogamurthy Vs the Chief Engineer

The Management of Vs the Principal Secretary

Sri. K.N. Ramesh Babu Vs the State of Karnataka

M/S Raghavendra Associates, Vs the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner