Disposed

Mr.Kaatam Prabhakar reddy v. The Telangana State Northern Power Distribution Company Ltd.

Telangana HC29 Oct 2021WP/18829/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A writ petition challenging the illegality of inaction on a representation regarding land acquisition for an electricity pole. The respondents submitted that objections were accepted and further notice would be issued. The High Court directed respondents to dispose of objections within four weeks to maintain status quo, leading to the disposal of the petition.

What did the court decide?

Order to dispose objections within 4 weeks; maintain status quo; Writ Petition disposed of without costs.

Mr.Kaatam Prabhakar reddy Vs The Telangana State Northern… — Land Acquisition | Telangana HC (2021)

¶1

HIGH COURT FOR THE SI ('r;;,;' 615,'5 1553j,S,flf A r H vD ERA BA D

¶2

FRIDAY, THETWEI

¶3

rwo rHous'Xffi }IilJl?AK

¶4

oF ocroBER

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HON'BLE SRIJUSTICE T.VINOD KUMAR

¶7

WRIT PETITION NO. 18829 OF 2021

¶8

Between:

¶9

Mr.Kaatam Prabhakar Reddy, s/o Thirupati Reddy, Aged 46 years, occ. Business H.N_o. 1-314/3, Ponakal Village, Jannaram lVanOdt, Mincheribt disi.

¶10

2 IVr.Sitimala Bharat Kumar, slo Gangaram, Aged 37 years, occ. agriculture, H.No. 1 -215, Vinayaknagar, Ponakal, Mandal Janniram, tvianchbrial Dis"trict.

¶11

...PETITIONERS

¶12

AND

¶13

The Telangan-a State. Northern Power Distribution Company Ltd., having its Qgrporatg Qffice^{at Vidyuth Bhavan Nakkalagutta, HanamkondaWarangal} District 506002 rep by its Chairman and Managing Director

¶14

') The Superintending Engineer, Operation TS NPDCL lVlancherial Mancherial District

¶15

3 The Divisional Engineer Operation, TSNPDCL f\llancherial [r,4ancherial District 4 The Assistant Divisional Engineer, Jannaram Mancherial District E

¶16

The Assistant Engineer Operation, Jannaram Mancherial District

¶17

6 Sambari Anjaiah, S/o Ramaiah aged 65^years Occupation Agriculture^Fl/o. Ponkal Village, Jannaram Mandal,^{Ir,4ancherial} District Erstwhile^{Adilabad District} Telangana

¶18

...RESP.NDENTS

¶19

Petition under Article 226 of^{the Constitutionof lndia praying that in the} circumstances stated^{in the affidavitfiled therewith,the High courtmay be pleased} to issue a appropriate^{writ, order or orders, more particularlyone in the nature of} writ of mandamus to^{respondentsin not taking action on the representation dt.} 07lo8l2o21 is illegal,^{arbitrary and violativeof principleof Natural Justice, Article21} 300- A of the constitution^{of lndia, consequently direct the respondents to follow the} dueprocessoflawwhileerectingtheelectricitypoleinsy.no.3lg/aalA,319/atoan extent of 42^{sq.yards' and 33.75 sq 'yardsrespectively' Jannaram'GP Ponaka} revenue shivar,^{Mancheral District'}

¶20

IAN :1OF 2021

¶21

Petition under^{Section151 CPC prayingthat in the circumstancesstated in} the affidavit^{filed in supportof the petition, the High Court maybe pleasedto issuea} directiontotherespondentstotakeactionontherepresentationdt.0T108/20211o follow the due^{processof law while erectingthe electricity polein sy.no' 319 laalA'} 319/a to an extent^{of 42 sq. yards, and 33 75 sq yards respectively' JannaramGP} Ponakarevenueshivar,mancheraldistrictPendingdisposaloftheWritPetition.

¶22

Counsel for^{the Petitioners:SRI POCHAIAH DORISHETTI} a;;;;;l for^{the RespondentNos'1 to 5: SRI ZAKIR ALI DANISH'}

¶23

S.G. FOR^{T.S. N.P.D.C.L.}

¶24

Counsel for^{the Respondent No'6:SRI CHANDRAIAH SUNKARA}

¶25

The Court made^{the following:ORDER}

¶26

THE HON,BLE^{SRI ]USTICE T. VINODKUMAR}

¶27

Writ Petition^{No.18829of 2021}

¶28

ORDER:

¶29

The present writ^{petition is filedwith the following prayer:}

¶30

"For the reasons^{stated in the accompanyingaffidavit,it is} therefore^prayed that this^{HonbleCouftmay be pleased to issue} an appropriate writ, order^{or orders, more parttcularly one in the} nature of writ of^{mandamusto respondentsin not takingaction} on the representation dt. 07/08/2021^{is illegal arbitrary and} violative of principle of Natural Justice,^{Aftrcles21 and300'4 of} the constitution of IndiT consequently direct the respondents to follow the due^process of law while erecting the electricity^pole in Sy.No.319/aa/A-319/a to an extent of 42 sq. yards and 33.75 sq.yards, respectively, Jannaram GP Ponaka revenue shivar, Mancheral District and to pass such other order or orders as this Honble Coutt may deem fit and proper in the ct'rcumstances of the case and in the interest ofjustice. "

¶31

2, Heard Sri D.Pochaiah, learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri Zakir Ali Danish, learned standing counsel appearing for respondent Nos.1 to 5, and Ms.Anusha, learned counsel representing Sri Chandraiah Sunkara, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the 6th respondent.

¶32

it is brought to the notice of this Court by the learned standing counsel that pursuant to the directions, dated 19.04.2021, given by this Court in W.P.No.10067 of 2021, the official respondents have issued notices to the petitioners as well as to the 6th respondent for taking steps/action in accordance with law. Learned standing counsel also submits that the objections submitted by the petitioners, uidelefter dated 07.08.2021, has been taken into consideration, while issuing notices to the parties, as directed by this Court in the aforestated writ petition. He further submits that upon the petitioners as well as the 6th respondent offering their objections to the notices issued by the official respondents,

¶33

¶34

further action in accordetnce with law would be taken by the officiat resp,ndents, He thereforesubmits that the grievance of the petitioners in thi present writ petition has been duly addressed and no further orders are necessary to be passed in this matter.

¶35

Having regard to the submissions made, and since notices have already been issued to the petitioners as weil as the unofficial respondent by the officiar respondents to consider the objections of the petitioners pursuant to the directions issued by this Court in W.p.No,10067 of 2A2t, the official respondents are directed to dispose of the objections of the petitioners within a period of four (4) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and communicate the same to the pafties concerned. Pending such adjudication, the respondents shall maintain status quo.

¶36

Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of, Miscellaneous

¶37

petitions, if any, pending in this writ petition shall stand closed, No order

as to costs.

SD/.K.VENKAIAH

ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

//TRUE COPY//

SECTION OFFICER

To. '"'.,| . Th" Chairman and N/anaging Director, Telangana State Northern Power Distribution companv'"Lii]"'n5'i"g G-.qorporat"e^{Office at Vidyuth Bhavan} Iirit atigutt,^{Hanam(ondaWarang-al District 506002}

¶44

z fr,d''3rE"iint""ai"g^{'ilgi-n"Li, -oi,e1ition TS NPDCLMancherialMancherial} District

¶45

g. Thi Sivisional Engineer Operation, TSNPDCL^{1vlancherialMancherial District} ;. tii; A.;i.tant^{oiuisionjtEhgineer' Jannaram MancherialDistrict} d. id; A;ai;i;ni^{engineei ope-ration'Jannaramlvlancherial District} 6. o;;'cC^{t,o SiiFoir,aiarrdorishetti,Advojqte.tof uql} i. on; cc io^{Sri zat<irAti oinish' s.c. for T S N} lrQ,9^l'^toPucl 8. 6;; CC 6 sii^{ChindraiahSunkara, Advocate (oPUC)'}

¶46

Two CD Copies. 10.One SPare^CoPY.

IVP TR

I ,I

HIGH COURT

DATED:2911012021

ORDER

WP.No.18829 ot 2021

e s TA rA:
c 11 N0v20?1
L)

¶54

DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS

¶55

at
d)

Mr.Kaatam Prabhakar reddy v. The Telangana State Northern Power Distribution Company Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mr.Kaatam Prabhakar reddy v. The Telangana State Northern Power Distribution Company Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

K.Prasanth Kumar and 8 others Vs The State of Telangana and 3 others

Mr.Suresh Varma Katari Vs The Southern Power Distribution Company of Telangana

M/s. Amara Agro Chemicals Vs The State of Telangana

M/s Uplands Finance and chit funds (p) Ltd. (In Liqn) Vs No respondent

M/s. Sri Raj Rajeshwara Finance and Investment Ltd.,(ln Liqn.) Vs No respondent

M/s. Vara Vara Chits Ltd.,(In Liqn.) Vs No Respondent