Smt Laxmamma Vs State of Karnataka

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF WRIT OF CERTIORARI BY QUASHING THE IMPUGNED NOTICE BEARING NO.SAKAANIEM(V)/KIUV/SALE/202526/1899 DATED 05/08/2025 ISSUED BY THE 2^ND RESPONDENT FOR DISCONNECTION OF THE ELECTRICITY SUPPLY TO THE RR.NO. BEARING W7LG6513, W7LG36848 AND W7LG39072 AT ANNEXURE-A AND ETC.

¶22

THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶23

CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA

¶24

ORAL ORDER

¶25

The petitioner is before this Court seeking for the

¶26

following reliefs:

¶27

a) issue a writ in the nature of writ of certiorari by quashing the impugned notice bearing No.SAKAANIEM(V)/KIUV/SALE/2025-26/1899

¶28

dated 05/08/2025 issued by the 2^nd respondent for disconnection of the electricity supply to the RR.No. bearing W7LG6513, W7LG36848 and W7LG39072 at Annexure-A

¶29

b) Issue a writ in the nature of writ of mandamus directing the 2^nd respondent not to take

¶30

3 - NC: 2025:KHC:39728 WP No. 25832 of 2025

¶31

HC-KAR

¶32

any steps for disconnection of the said RR No. bearing W7LG6513, W7LG36848 and W7LG39072

¶33

c) Pass any order (s) or direction(s), as this Hon’ble Court in the facts and circumstances of the case

¶34

d) And award the cost of these proceedings in the interest of justice and equity.

¶35

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner,

¶36

the learned AGA for respondent No.1 and learned counsel for respondents 2 and 3 and perused the material on record.

¶37

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is residing in House No. 79, Geru Palya, Kumbalagodu, for over three decades. Electricity connection bearing meter No. W7LG6513 was granted to her on 13.11.2022 by the second respondent after verification of all the requisite documents. Subsequently, power supply 0.160 KW was sanctioned on 30.11.2010 under RR No. W7LG36848 for commercial use and 0.1 KW on 26.08.2011 under RR No. W7LG390072. It is

¶38

4 - NC: 2025:KHC:39728 WP No. 25832 of 2025

¶39

HC-KAR

¶40

submitted that despite continuous lawful supply and regular payment of bills, the second respondent issued a notice requiring the petitioner to produce the title deeds of the premises within three days. The petitioner replied that she has been residing there since three decades, regularly paying the electricity charges and also applied for regularization of 2 acres in Sy. No. 86. However, without considering her reply, the second respondent again issued another notice dated 26.12.2024 threatening disconnection. According to the petitioner, the impugned notice is arbitrary, without authority and unsustainable in law.

¶41

Per contra, the learned counsel appearing for respondent Nos. 2 and 3 submits that the petitioner is an unauthorised occupant and is in illegal possession of Government land, therefore the notice calling upon her to produce the title deeds is justified.

¶42

5 -

¶43

NC: 2025:KHC:39728 WP No. 25832 of 2025

¶44

HC-KAR

¶45

This Court has carefully considered the rival contentions and perused the material on record.

¶46

Power conferred upon the authority-respondent No.2 is limited to matters concerning supply, billing and recovery of dues under the applicable electricity laws. The said authority cannot adjudicate ownership or title disputes relating to premises. Respondent No.2 has clearly exceeded his jurisdiction by calling upon the petitioner to produce the title deeds and threatening disconnection of supply for non-compliance. Whether the petitioner is an authorized occupant or otherwise is a matter to be decided by the competent authority, not by the second respondent. Accordingly, the impugned notice issued by the second respondent is without jurisdiction and liable to be quashed. Hence, this Court pass the following:

¶47

ORDER

¶48

(a) The Writ Petition is allowed .

¶49

6 -

¶50

NC: 2025:KHC:39728 WP No. 25832 of 2025

¶51

HC-KAR

¶52

(b) The impugned notice issued by the second respondent at Annexure-A is hereby quashed.

¶53

(c) The respondents 2 and 3 to continue the power supply to the petitioner, subject to the petitioner regularly paying the electricity charges as and when they fall due.

¶54

Sd/-

¶55

JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA

¶56

CKL List No.: 1 Sl No.: 74

Smt Laxmamma v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt Laxmamma v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri H v Narayan Swamy Vs Sri B R Lokanath

Smt Prema B S Vs Sri Vijaya N

M/S Kennametal India Limited Vs G N Jaiprakash

Smt Devarajamma Vs State of Karnataka

Sri Jagadguru Murugarajendra Bruhan Mutta Vs State of Karnataka

The Executive Engineer Vs H R Sathish