Disposed

D. Manik Reddy v. The State of Telangana and 4 others

Telangana HC1 Sept 2020WP/12152/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a writ petition seeking restoration of power supply disconnected for alleged theft of energy. The Court found that fifty percent of the assessed amount and compounding fees were paid, and power was partially restored. It stayed further coercive steps pending a Special Court decision while requiring the petitioner to pay regular charges.

What did the court decide?

Respondents directed not to take any coercive steps including disconnection of power supply till a decision is taken by the Special Court under Section 154(5) of the Electricity Act, conditionally on

D. Manik Reddy Vs The State of Telangana and 4 others — Consumer Protection | Telangana HC (2020)

¶1

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶2

TUESDAY, THE FIRST DAY OF SEPTEIVBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.LAKSHMAN

¶5

WRIT PETITION NO: 12152 OF 2020

¶6

Between:

¶7

D. I/anik Reddy, S/o Bhoom Reddy Aged 48 years Occ. Agriculture R/o. Ameenpur village Patancheru Mandal, Sangareddy District

¶8

...PETITIONER

¶9

AND

¶10

1 The State of Telangana, Represented by its Principal Secretary, Energy, Secretariat Building, Saifabad, Hyderabad

¶11

2 The Southern Power Distribution Company of Telangana State Ltd., represented by its Chairman and I\rlanaging Director, Mint Compound, Hyderabad.

¶12

r) The Superintendent Engineer (Operations), Sangareddy Telangana State Southern Power Distribution Company Limited, Sangareddy District

¶13

4 Assistant Divisional Engineer (Operations), Telangana State Southern Power Distribution Company Limited, Patancheru, Sangareddy District

¶14

5 The Assistant Engineer Operations, Telangana State Southern Power Distribution Company Limited, Ameenpur village, Patancheru Mandal, Sangareddy District

¶15

...RESPONDENTS

¶16

Petition under Article 226 o'f the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be^pleased to issue a Writ, Order or direction, more particularly one in the nature of a Writ of lvlandamus declaring the action of the 5th respondent in disconnecting the service connection bearing No.0502 03052 for borewell situated in Sy.No.138 Ameenpur village, Patancheru l,4andal, Sangareddy District as arbitrary, illegal and without jurisdiction, gross misuse of power besides violation of Principles of natural justice and also contrary to the Provisions of Electricity Act, 2003, and in violation of rights guaranteed under Articles 14, 19 (1) (g) and 300-4 of Constitution of lndia, consequently to direct the respondents to restore the power supply to the servtce connection bearing No.0502 03052 for borewell by accepting regular monthly electric consumption charges situated in Sy.No.138 Ameenpur village, Patancheru IVandal, Sangareddy District.

¶17

lA NO: 1 OF 2020

¶18

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be^pleased to direct

¶19

the respondents to restore the^power supply to the^{service connectionbearing} No.0502 03052, for borewell by accepting regular^{monthlyelectricconsumption} charges situated in Sy.No.'1 3B Ameenpur village, Patancheru [t4andal, Sangareddy

District.

lA NO: 2 OF 2020

Between:

The Southern Power Distribution Company of Telangana State Ltd., represented by its Chairman and N,4anaging Director, lvlint Compound, Hyderabad.

¶24

The Superintendent Engineer (Operations), Sangareddy Telangana State Southern Power Distribution Company Limited, Sangareddy District

¶25

The Assistant Divisional Engineer (Operations), Telangana State Southern Power Distribution Company Limited, Patancheru, Sangareddy District

¶26

The Assistant Engineer Operations, Telangana State Southern Power Distribution Company Limited, Ameenpur village, Patancheru t,4andal, Sangareddy District

¶27

...PETITIONERS/RESPONDENTS 2 to 5

¶28

AND

¶29

D. lVanik Reddy, S/o Bhoom Reddy, Aged 48 years, Occ. Agriculture, R/o. Ameenpur village Patancheru ltlandal, Sangareddy District.

¶30

..RESPONDENT/PETITIONER

¶31

The State of Telangana, Represented by its Principal Secretary, Energy, Secretariat Building, Saifabad, Hyderabad

¶32

...RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT NO.,I

¶33

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to vacate the interim orders dated 1710812020 in l.A. No. 01 of 2020 in WP No. 12152of 2020 and dismiss the writ petition.

¶34

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI N. MANOHAR

¶35

Counsel for the Respondent No.1: GP FOR ENERGY

¶36

Counsel for the Respondent Nos.2 to 5: SRI R. VINOD REDDY,

¶37

S.C. FOR TRANSCO

¶38

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶39

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K. LAKSHMAN WRIT PETITION No.l2I52 OF 2020

¶40

OIlDER:

¶41

This Writ Petition is flled to declare the action of the 5')'respondent llt discon-necting the service connection bearing No.0502 03052 in sur-vey No.138, situated in Ameenpur village, Patancheru Mandal, Sangareddy District, as arbitrary and illegal.

¶42

Heard Sri N. Manohar, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Government Pleader'. for Energy, appearing for the 1'1 respondent and Sri R. Vinod Reddy, learned standing counsel for the respondents 2 to 5.

¶43

Sri N. Manohar, leamed counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is the beneficiary and he is claiming the subject properly under a Gift Deed. Pursuant to the proceedings dated 05.06.2015 issued by the 4th respondent,50Yo of the assessed amount i.e. Rs.6,70,605i- and also an amount of Rs.67.000/- towards cornpounding fee has been paid. The said fact is not disputed by Sri R. Vinod Reddy, learned standing counsel for respondents 2 to 5.

¶44

Vide order, dated 17.08.2020, this Court by recording the sdbrnission of the learned counsel fol the petitioner that 50% of the assessed amount and also the compounding fee has been paid in the ' year 2015 itself, directed the respondent authoritiei to restore the power supply to the petitioner's premises. In compliance of the said

¶45

order, the power supply has been restored,^{rryhich is conlimled by Sri}

¶46

R, Vinod Reddy, learned counsel tbr the respondents

¶47

5 In the counter affidavit filed by the 4th respondent, it is specifically mentioned that the service connection bearing SC^No. 0502 03052, category LT-II (B) - Non Domestic/Commercial located in Sy.No.138 of Ameenpur Village, Patancheru Mandal, Sangareddy District, in the name of the petitioner's father P. Ananth Reddy, was inspected on 05.06.2015. It was found that the petitioner has tapped over head lines deliberalely and intentionally committed theft of energy. A provisional notice dated 05.06.2015 was issued for theft of energy under Section 135 of the Electricity Act and the revenue loss was assessed at Rs.13,41,211l- and Sri Ananth Reddy was directed to pay 50o/o of the assessed amount i.e. Rs.6,70,605/- and also compounding charges of Rs.67,000/-.

¶48

In view of the. above stated facts and also recording the submissions made by the leamed counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned standin! counsel for the respondents that 50% of the assessed amount i.e. Rs.6,70,605/- and the compounding fee of Rs.67,000/- has been paid and the power supply to the petitioner's premises has been restored pursuant to the order dated 17.08.2020, this Writ Petition is disposed of directing the respondents not to take any coercive steps including disconnection of power supply to the petitioner's service sonnection No.0502 03052 till a decision is taken and orders passed by the Special Court under Section 154 (5) of the

¶49

¶50

Electricity Act on condition that the petitioner shall pay regular C.C. charges.

¶51

Miscellaneous petirions pending, if any, shall stand disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶52

SD/.N,CHANDRA SEKHAR ASSISTANT REG AR ,TRUE COPY//

¶53

SECTIO OFFICER

¶54

To, 1. The Principal Secretary, Energy, State of Telangana, Secretariat Building, Saifabad, Hyderabad

¶55

1. The Chairman and lt/anaging Director, Southern Power Djstribution Company of Telangana State Ltd., Mint Compound, Hyderabad.

¶56

1. The Superintendent Engineer (Operations), Sangareddy Telangana State Southern Power Distribution Company Limited, Sangareddy District

¶57

1. The Assistant Divisional Engineer (Operations), Telangana State Southern Power Distribution Company Limited, Patancheru, Sangareddy District

¶58

1. The Assistant Engineer Operations, Telangana State Southern Power Distribution Company Limited, Ameenpur village, Patancheru Mandal, Sangareddy District

¶59

6 One CC to Sri N. I,4anohar, Advocate IOPUCI 7 Two CCs to GP for Energy, High Court for the State of Telangana. [OUT] 8I Two One CD Copies.CC to Sri R. Vinod Reddy, S.C. for TRANSCO [OPUC]

Atl!

HIGH COURT

DATED:01 10912020

ORDER

rtE sT4 16-
oo O B SEP 2O2O C
*
ijs ,

¶66

WP.No.12152 of 2020

¶67

DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS

¶68

-/ r ^, o,
{q)fi.}

D. Manik Reddy v. The State of Telangana and 4 others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

D. Manik Reddy v. The State of Telangana and 4 others

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

T. Chandrakala Vs State of Telangana

Ch. Mahendar Reddy, And 6 Others Vs The Superintending Engineer, And 6 Others

Kusumpudi Ravindra Vs The Telangana State Road Transport Corporation and 4 others

Moluguri Vamshi or Vamshi Krishna Vs The State of Telangana

Anujh Joshi Vs The State of Telangana

M/s.Flycon Bricks Industries Vs The State of Telangana adn 4 others