Smt. Gangamma, Vs the Office of Municipal Council

S.K.SRINIVAS S/O KEMPAIAH Digitally signed by AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS GEETHAKUMARI R/AT NO. 1388 PARLATTAYA S VIJAYANAGAR 2^ND STAGE, Location: High OPP J.S.S.P.U COLLEGE Court of Karnataka MYSORE - 570 017.

¶12

…PETITIONERS

¶13

(BY SRI SHIVARAMA BHAT O., ADVOCATE)

¶14

AND:

¶15

THE OFFICE OF MUNICIPAL COUNCIL REP. BY ITS COMMISSIONER NANJANGUDU, MYSURU - 571 301.

¶16

2 - NC: 2025:KHC:30786 WP No. 23077 of 2023

¶17

HC-KAR

¶18

THE CHAMUNDESHWARI ELECTRICITY SUPPLY COMPANY SUB-DIVISION NANJANGUDU REP. BY ITS ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, NANJANGUDU, MYSURU - 571 301.

¶19

…RESPONDENTS

¶20

(BY SRI P.MAHESHA, ADVOCATE FOR R.1; SMT.PADMA S.UTTUR, ADVOCATE FOR R.2)

¶21

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 27.09.2023 PASSED BY RESPONDENT NO.1 IN VIDE ANNEXURE-A AND DIRECT RESPONDENT NO.2 TO RECONNECT THE TEMPORARY ELECTRICITY CONNECTION TO METER NO.4640049324.

¶22

THIS WRIT PETITION IS COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN B-GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶23

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V HOSMANI

¶24

3 -

¶25

NC: 2025:KHC:30786 WP No. 23077 of 2023

¶26

HC-KAR

¶27

ORAL ORDER

¶28

Challenging order dated 27.09.2023 passed by respondent no.1 at Annexure-A and to direct respondent no.2 to reconnect power supply to Meter no.4640049324, this writ petition is filed.

¶29

Perusal of writ petition would reveal that petitioner was owner of land bearing Sy.no.58 measuring 36 guntas and 2 acres 20 guntas in Sy.no.59 of Deveerammanahalli, Kasaba Hobli, Nanjanagudu Taluk, Mysuru District, having purchased it under Sale Deed dated 16.05.1962. It is stated that said land was got converted into industrial purposes as per Tahasildar's order dated 23.10.1980. Thereafter, application was made to Assistant Commissioner, Nanjanagudu, to change land from industrial to residential purposes, which was granted as per Annexure-C. It was stated, name of petitioner's husband was entered in Revenue records in Panchayath and subsequently, layout as per Annexure-E was approved by Kalale Mandal Panchayath. In terms of same, petitioner had laid sites and sold 15 of them. When petitioner sought E-khata in respect of sites no.1 to 48, respondent no.1 issued Endorsement dated 03.10.2022 as per Annexure-F. In response to same, petitioner

¶30

4 -

¶31

NC: 2025:KHC:30786 WP No. 23077 of 2023

¶32

HC-KAR

¶33

submitted all documents. Petitioner had also filed application for survey of land. However, in meanwhile, respondent no.1 issued impugned communication at Annexure-A to respondent no.2 to take action for disruption of power supply to layout. Same being contrary to law was being challenged before this Court.

¶34

Sri P.Mahesha, learned counsel for respondent no.1 and Smt.Padma S.Uttur, learned counsel for respondent no.2 opposed petition. It was submitted by learned counsel for respondent no.1 that respondent no.1 had noticed illegal entries in records of respondent no.1-CMC and FIR no.16/2024 was also registered by Nanjanagudu Town Police in this regard. In view of same, respondent no.1 has sent intimation as per Annexure-A to respondent no.2 to take action. It was further submitted, Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Rajendra Kumar

¶35

Barjatya and Another v. U.P.Avas Evam Vikas Parishad

¶36

and Others reported in 2024 SCC OnLine SC 3767 had directed, local bodies including electricity supply companies to verify strict compliance with building by laws, etc. and not to provide essential services to buildings not confirming to requirements of law. It was further submitted, Annexure-A was

¶37

5 -

¶38

NC: 2025:KHC:30786 WP No. 23077 of 2023

¶39

HC-KAR

¶40

communication between respondents no.1 and 2 and before

¶41

any action could be taken thereon, petitioner has approached this Court. Therefore, writ petition is not tenable.

¶42

Heard learned counsel and perused writ petition

¶43

records.

¶44

From above, petitioner's grievance against Annexure-A is apprehending action for disruption of power supply. Though petitioner has stated that in pursuance of Annexure-F dated 03.10.2022, petitioner had furnished records called for, there would be no impediment for petitioner to furnish records to establish compliance with requirements of law insofar as formation of layout and construction before respondent no.2-authoriteis against any pending action in pursuance of Annexure-A.

¶45

In view of above, writ petition need not be retained. Same is disposed of by directing petitioner to furnish records to establish compliance with directions issued by Hon'ble Supreme Court in para 21 of judgment in Rajendra Kumar Barjatya 's case ( supra ) within two weeks from today. Respondents to consider same and if any further

¶46

NC: 2025:KHC:30786 WP No. 23077 of 2023

¶47

6 -

¶48

HC-KAR

¶49

documents/records are required to be called for, petitioner be permitted to produce same within two weeks and thereafter, respondents to pass appropriate orders under intimation to petitioner. Until then, interim granted in this writ petition dated 13.10.2023 to be in force.

¶50

Smt. Padma S.Uttur, learned counsel is permitted to file

¶51

memo of appearance within four weeks.

¶52

Sd/(RAVI V HOSMANI) JUDGE

¶53

AV

¶54

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 47

¶55