Allowed

Kotha Sathyam v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC11 Nov 2021WP/23951/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ petition challenged the illegal disconnection of the petitioner's electricity supply caused by the respondents' failure to provide prior notice. The High Court observed that stripping the service without notice violated principles of natural justice and directed the restoration of power immediately, while reserving the right of the state to initiate legal action later via proper process.

What did the court decide?

Directed respondents to restore the power connection provided to the petitioner's house forthwith under the specified number.

Kotha Sathyam Vs The State of Telangana — Writ and Judicial Review | Telangana HC (2021)

¶1

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA^{AT HYDERABAD} (Special Original J urisdiction)

¶2

THURSDAY, THE ELEVENTH DAY^{OF NOVEMBER} TWO THOUSAND^{AND TWENTYONE}

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HON'BLE^{SRIJUSTICE T.VINOD KUMAR}

¶5

WRIT PETI^TI oN NO.2 sl oF 20 ,|

¶6

Between:

¶7

Kotha Sathyam,^{S/o Kotha Yellaiah' Aged about 53 Yrs' Occ Bus;ng5s' ft/e Plot} No 109 and^{Part, H:ri;:?;s"U;il1!-*yt'lagai-phiio-l'Abdullapur Villase'} ...PETlrloNER i6o,jrrp"irtri,iuandal,^{Ransa Reddv District}

¶8

...PETlrloNER

¶9

o*? .no state of Telangana' Rep' by its Principal secretary'^{EnergyDepartment'}

¶10

:r""xflfiiilt,luffi'f'ffi 4. The^{Assistant Eng} fl nqrttTkffi

¶11

;fl Pvt. Service' Lui,tl'"8[i'fi^{lv o'} 'filsi{{,[iH'J:; j,1l'i1,He^'x;03?13i"$l]'[i49"?i;

¶12

3;R'1ffi .il-:):':

¶13

'"?l',it:'jmp**:L1in"lls*s:x.l.3e.I'r;ff

¶14

PetitionunderArticle226oftheConstitutionoflndiaprayingthatinthe circumstancesstatedintn"tttiOu'ittf"dtherewith'theHighCourtmaybepleasedto issueappropriateWrit';;;"'directionmoreparticularlyoneinthenatureofWRIT OF^{MANDAMUSugu'nO ;"Respondents No 1 to 4 hereinfor their inaction and} causing^{inconvenienceand not providingPower supply by fixing the Meter to my} house^{No. 7-3g (plot on.n No. 109 and 109 Part), situatedat Abdullapur Village} andMandal''"n'*"iO'-District'asillegal'u'oit'u'y'againsttheprinciplesof natural^{justice and consequentlydirect the respondent No.1 to 4 to release the power} supPlY^{bY fixing meter'}

¶15

IA NO: 10^F2021 er Section^{151 CPCPraYing tha} t in^{the circumstances stated in the} Petition^und ourt^{maY be Pleased to directthe} the^HighC affid^{avit filed in support o{ the petition'} fixing^{the Meter to Petitioners} ower^suPPlYbY ResPondent^{No 1 to 4 to releasethe P} and^{109 Part)'} situated^{at AbdullaPur Village} house No.^{7-39 (Plot bearingNo' 109} and^{Mandal, Ranga Reddy District}

¶16

i,1l11fi^{11:i:,:,*lftiT:::'.#f$r$,,xiiRir,?r;;"..}

¶17

Counsel^{for the Respondent Nos'S & 6:-}

¶18

The^{Courtmadethe following:ORDER}

¶19

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE T. VINOD KUMAR

¶20

Writ Petition No,2395 lof 2027

¶21

ORDER

¶22

?his writ petition is filed questioning the action of respondent Nos.I to 4 the petidonern o,.o.,J"o:ril"": ;.rT;" ff il;; and lO9(part), situated Abdulapur village and Ranga Reddy District, as being ilregar.

¶23

Heard learned "o""t' for the petitioner, learned Government preader ,o. and sri R Vinod R.dd),, ::::.""ff rs, respondent ::jr. counse'l appearing for respondent Nos.2 to 4. Dcc-;+^ _-'*.'"'116 ot"o"e service of notice on respondent Nos'6 and 7, none "oo.. rs on their behalf.

¶24

The peririon constructed a house bv X';:had ;ff:";;"" not"'t" concerned and tto power conne"oo" the respondents' upon which, ,n" bearing No.64s9/z,respondents "uut "'"ttfu electricity meter provided electrical 5c284$2' through 'n"""' , the petitioner was connection to rris resial t"'' further stated that premises' Jt is respondent Nos' I to o notice to the petition "no" issuing any er' all of a sudden tt-o'' connecdon provided oo,,rro,]: ,::::j; caused severe hardshl- rp and il-,:"'*'*n inconvenience.

¶25

The petjdoner .r rould further contencl that on enquiries, he had learnt that the ;.'::'.:::x.::rffi,::"::,::d^{" such dras'[ic} ;;:.., ;: Jl,o^conrend,r", ;j":::r,t:*::;' Nos. I to 4 lack

¶26

----.--

¶27

¶28

authority to disconnect^{the electrical connection providedmerely} based on some^{complaintsgiven by third parties'}

¶29

Sri R.Vinod^{Reddy, learned counsel appearingfor respondent} Nos.2 to^{4 on being queriedby this Courtas to whetherany notice} has been issued^{to the petitioner,beforeresorting to disconnection'} fairly submitted^{that no such noticewas given'However'he seeks} to^justify the^{action of the respondentson the ground that the} location of^{the premises,to which the petitionerhad sought for} providing electrical^{connection, does not match with the plot as} shown in^{the layout to whichthe unofficial respondents have laid} their claim.

¶30

Without^{expressing any opinionon the saidcontentions} urged on^{behatf of the respondents'it is to be seen that if the} respondents^{have toresort todisconnection of the service} connection^{provided,the petitioner ought to have been put on} notice before^{resortingto such action' Since it is admittedthat no} such^{notice is given to the petitioner before disconnecting the} serviceconnectionalreadyprovided,thesamewouldamountto violation^{of principlesof natural justice'}

¶31

In view^{of the same'the action of the respondentsrn} disconnecting^{the power connection providedto the house of the} cannot^{becountenanced'The respondents} are petitioner accordingly^{directed to restorethe power connection providedto} under acknowledgment the Petitioner's^house No.NR678203^{O44g2 I 17 -SE,P -2O2O forthwith'}

¶32

However,^{it is made clear that if the respondents intend to} initiate^{any action against the petitioner' if so advised' theyare at}

¶33

¶34

liberty to do so by following due process of law, after putting the petitioner on notice.

¶35

¶36

L Subject to the above, the writ petition is allowed. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this writ petition shall

¶37

stand closed. No order as to costs.

¶38

¶39

SD/.R.KARTHI KEYAN

¶40

//TRUE COPYII ASSISTANT REGI STRAR ,ll

¶41

To, sECTto N OFFICER 'l . The principal Secr ^^{Hyderabad.etary'Energy Department, State of Telangana,} Secretariat, J. ' 33:": the Assistant ff '&*. Divis Distribution CL, Having

¶42

: fts"frxflTFndit",ftlffil,lffiir#i,"ffi ;if: Having its

¶43

To,

¶44

; iffi ;8J?J8r',?l['fi?J,ii1S,{,A1'.??Sli;""B,r"FJ o, r",",nana at Hyderabad.

¶45

{ i,XS 33 tfil| Vinod Reddv, s c ror r s S.p.D c.L (opuc)

¶46

,or.^{,n" Spare Copy.}

z--

HIGH COURT

DATED:1^111,,112021

ORDER

,r'; 1$E s-la r4r
Y
?
'1
c!) 2 6 il0v l'

¶52

WP.No.23951^o12021

¶53

ALLOWING^{THE WRIT PETITION} WITHOUT^COSTS.

¶54

$.,
/+l

Kotha Sathyam v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kotha Sathyam v. The State of Telangana

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

Vankudothu Vijaya Vs The State of Telangana and 6 others

Billakuri Padma Vs The State of Telangana

M/s Arush Enterprises Vs The State of Telangana

Manthapuram Bala Krishna Rao Vs State of Telangana

M/s. Modi Builders and Realtors Pvt. Ltd, Vs The State of Telangana

Mohammed Shabuddin Vs The State of Telangana