Allowed

N. Pardha Saradhi v. Telangana State Southern Power Distribution Corporation Limited and 4 others

Telangana HC21 Sept 2021WP/22990/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of the petitioner's writ petitions filed for issuance of writ of mandamus directed towards the Telangana State Southern Power Distribution Corporation Limited and GHMC. The court ordered the respondents to provide individual service connections within four weeks, subject to further directions from pending state or Apex Court litigations.

What did the court decide?

Directing the respondents to provide individual service connection to the petitioner within four weeks of the order date.

N. Pardha Saradhi Vs Telangana State Southern Power… — Service and Employment | Telangana HC (2021)

¶1

HIGH COURT '^{FORTHE STATEOF TELANGANA} AT HYDERABAD

¶2

(SPecial Original^{Jurisdiction)}

¶3

TUESDAY,^{THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF SEPTEMBER} rWO THOUSEND^{AND TWENTYONE}

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE^{SRIJUSTICE K.LAKSHMAN}

¶6

WRIT PETI^{TIONNO: 22990 0F2021}

¶7

Between:

¶8

N.PardhaSaradhi,S/o.LateSri'N'Ramaiah'AgedTSyears'R/o'PlotNo'841'Ayyappa diii"iv,^{rttior,rpui, Hvderabad-500081} ...pETlTloNER

¶9

...pETlTloNER

¶10

AND

¶11

1 . Telangana^{State Southern Power DistributionCornoration Limited' Vidyut} ,ff :'#,::ffiis''"ttTi*"J3",t,l"tr,ll.**[nfl^{H'4'Y"1Bg''?P"''["'f ''} Corooration^{Limited, viSli'itb'onj'Somaiiguda'Hvderabad'}

¶12

'r rhp rlivisionat enqi n#,'ili'igi;''^{Stti" S6uthern?owerDistribution}

¶13

, Elitlsl',U,k'Eil,?S;[]iElirlll'delfei$B"ta^{State Southern power Distribution} 8i3"TJs^{:ifrsfr :Re p uv its co m m issio ne r' ra nk B u n k}

¶14

. 3:::l:l''xi^:l$:T Road, HYderabad ^)l??ff ...RESPONDENTS

¶15

...RESPONDENTS

¶16

Petition^{under Article 226 o'f the Constitution of lndia praying that in the} circumstances^{stated in tn"'rr]iJriiiir"Jtherewitn,tne Hioh court may be pleased to} issue any^writ,order "r.^{Oi*tti"t'''oreparticularly one" in the nature of WRIT of} IVIANDAMUS^{directing tn" ,"rp""o"nisto'actin accordance with law and to provide} service^{connections along ,iiii-"iu"tri.rrmeters to the building constructedon Plot} bearins^{No.B41, uo.u""ing'ioij!"q Yutot in Sy No 11/'14to 11/18 Part of Sv No 1 1} 6i"0""ii""-iousno^{SocietvLimited' Khanamet} villaoe. situated Serilingampally in^{Sri Swamv} ^il:#^H'fliiuf '^{R R District'witholt being influencedby the} instr-uctions^{of the 5th respondent}

¶17

IAN O:^{1oF 2021}

¶18

Petition^{underSection151 CPC prayingthat in the circumstances stated in the} affidavit^{filed in support} "t^{ii''" p"iniJt''iri{} connections-^{ils1,93yrt alongwith mav electrical be pleased meters to direct to thethe} respondents buildinq^{constructed to provide on} '"tit"^{"pfoi-o""ing No 8+f idmeasuring500 Sq Yards in} Sv.No.11/14^{to 11/.18 part tii,lr.f-riiiituated-in.SriSwamv AvyappaCooperative} H-ousing^{Society Limited,i'rrr',i"r"i'",ir"gl, S,erilingampallytVlandal, R R District} *in"riu"i"g^{,fluencedby the proceedingsof 5'n respondent}

¶19

Counsel^{for the Petitioner: SRI B'SRAVANKUMAR}

¶20

Counsel^{for the Respondent Nos"t to 4 : SRIR'VI*SR} [t$Xo""t

¶21

Counsel^{for the Respondent No'5 : SRI SAMPATH.PRABHAKARREDDY}

¶22

S.C. FOR^G.H.M.C.

¶23

The Court^{madethe following:ORDER}

¶24

THE HONOURABLE^{SRI JUSTICE K. LAKSHMAN}

¶25

WRIT PETITI^{ON No.22 990 0F 202t}

¶26

ORDER:

¶27

'I'his Writ Petition is frled for the following^relief:

¶28

direction^more "...to issue^an appropriate^{writ, order} in the nature of^Writ of Mandatnus particularly one ciirecting the^{respondents to act in accorclancewith law and} provide service connections^{along with electrical tnetersto} the builcling constructed^{onPlot BearingNo'U4 1'} admeasuring^{500 sq.yardsin Sy.No'11/ 14 to 11/ 18 part of} Sy.No.11 situated^{inSri Swamy AyyappaCooperative} Housing Societl'^{Limited, Khanamet Village, Serlingarnpally} Mandal, Ranga.^{F-eddy District withoutbeing influencedby} the instructions^{of the5trr respondent"'}

¶29

When the matter^{is taken up, it is submittedbY the learned} counsel fcr the^{petitioner that the issue raised in ttre present Writ} Petition is squarely^{covered by the oider dated 25'09'2019 passetl} by this Court^{in W.P.No.21 100 of 20 19'}

¶30

Sri R.Vinod Reddv,^{learned Standing Counsel for Telangana} state southern^{PowerDistribution company Limited,appearing} for respondent^{Nos. 1 to 4 and Sri Sampath PrabhakarReddy'} learned Standing^{Counsel for Greater HyderabadMunicipal} Corporation,^{appearing for respondent No'S, do not dispute the} aforesaid submission.

¶31

ln view of the above,^{for the reasonsalike in the said order'} this Writ Petition^{is disposed of directing the respondentsto} release individual^{service connection to the petitionerwithin a} period of four (4) weeks^{from the date of receiptof a copy of this} orcler,andthesameshallbesubjecttofurtherdirectionthatma'ri

¶32

¶33

be issued by the State of Telangana or the Apex Court in the

¶34

litigation pending before it arising out of the order dated

¶35

12.O9.2012 in Writ Petition No.20407 of 2008 and barch.

¶36

Miscellaneous petitions penrling, if any, shall stand closed.

¶37

'ihcre shall be no order as to costs.

SD/.K.SAILESHI

ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

/iTRUE COPY//

i 1r ''

SECTION OFFICER

The Chairman-cum-Managing Director, Telangana State Southern Power Distribution Corporation Limited, Vidyut Soudha Somajiguda, Hyderabad..

¶45

The Superintending Engineer, Telangana State Southern Power Distribution Corporation Limited, Vidyut Soudha, Somajiguda, Hyderabad.

¶46

3, The Divisional Engineer, Telangana State Southern Power Distribution Corporation Limited, Kukatpally, Hyderabad.

¶47

The Assistant Divisional Engineer, Telangana State Southern Power Distribution Corporation Limited, Madhapur, Hyderabad.

¶48

The Commissioner, Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, Tank Bunk Road, Hyderabad,

¶49

One CC to Sri B.Sravan Kumar, Advocate IOPUC]

¶50

One CC to Sri Sampath Prabhakar Reddy, SC for GHMC IOPUCI

¶51

Two CD Copies

¶52

One Spare Copy

¶53

(along with a copy of the order dated 2510912019 in WP No.21 100 of 2019)

¶54

Kj. t,{ l,/

HIGH COURT

DATED:21 10912021

ORDER

WP.No.22990 of 2021

<br>ir? STAT5
i),) 24 sEP202l
".)
,t.

¶60

DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS.

¶61

t.S

¶62

HON'BLE SRI JUSTTCE A.RAJASHEKER REDDY WRIT PETITION No.211OO OF 2019

¶63

ORDER:

¶64

This writ petition is filed aggrieved by action of respondents in not receiving the application and not releasing the power supply to the petitioner's house at premises bearing Plot No.350, admeasurrng 417 squa-re yards in Sy.No. llll4 to Lll18 situated at Khanamet Village, Serilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District.

¶65

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in similar circumstances, this Court disposed of WP.No.22849 of 2018, dated 05-07-2018.

¶66

Heard Sri R.Vinod Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for respondents 2 to 5 and Sri Sampath Prabhakar Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for respondent No.6.

¶67

In view of the same, for the reasons alike in the said order, the writ petition is disposed of directing^the respondents to receive the application^of the^{petitioner for} electric power supply connection^{by complying all the} norms as required by the^{respondent-Company'} As and when such application^{is made,the respondent-} Company is directed^{toprovide individualservice} connection to the^{petitioner within a periodof four weeks} from the date of^{submissionof such applicationand}

¶68

¶69

provision of such^{power supplyconnection shall be} subject to^{further direction that may be issued by the} State of Telangana^{or the SupremeCourt in the litigation} pending before^{itarising out of thejudgment} dated 12-09^{-2012 in WP'No'20407 of 2OO8 and batch'} Pending miscellaneous^{applications if any shall stand} c1o sed.

¶70

A.RAJASHEKER^REDDY,J

¶71

25-09-2019

¶72

Nv1

N. Pardha Saradhi v. Telangana State Southern Power Distribution Corporation Limited and 4 others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

N. Pardha Saradhi v. Telangana State Southern Power Distribution Corporation Limited and 4 others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/s, Indus Towers Limited Vs The State of Telangana

M/s, Indus Towers Limited Vs The State of Telangana and another

Beeravolu Venkat Reddy Vs The State of Telangana

Mohammed Sadiquddin Vs The State of Telangana

A. Sandeep (Sandeep Kumar Akula) Vs The Telangana State and 3 others

M/s. R.K. Traders Vs The Government of Telangana