Disposed

Komarapu Tirupathi Rao v. The Southern Power Distribution Company of Telangana State Ltd. and 4 others

Telangana HC16 Nov 2021WP/27347/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Telangana disposed of a writ petition filed by K. Tirupathi Rao seeking direction to respondents to provide 15 new domestic electric meters and release power supply to his residential premises. The Court held that the matter be disposed of as suited and directed the petitioner to file an application through proper channels within four weeks.

What did the court decide?

The petitioner directed to submit an application before Respondents 2 and 3 seeking release of power supply preferably within four weeks; the role of Respondent 5 is to ensure the same is not influenc

Komarapu Tirupathi Rao Vs The Southern Power… — Service and Employment | Telangana HC (2021)

¶1

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

¶2

TUESDAY, THE SIXTEENTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENIY ONE

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HON'BLE SRIJUSTICE T.VINOD KUMAR

¶5

WRIT PETITION NO.27347 0F 2021

¶6

Between:

¶7

(o_malgpu Tirupathi Rao, S/o. Late K. Ramulu Age.49 years, Occ. Business, Fl/o. 2-51, Kukatpally Village, Medchal Malkajgiri District.

¶8

...PETITIONER

¶9

AND

¶10

The Southern Power Distribution Company of Telangana State Ltd., Rep. by its Chairman and lVanaging Director having its Corporate office at 6-,l-50, [/int Compound, Hyderabad 5000063.

¶11

The Superintending Engineering, Operation Kukatpally TSSPDCL.

¶12

The_ Divisional Engineer (Electrical) Operation, Kukatpally Sub Division TSSPDCL.

¶13

The Assistant Divisional Engineer OP/ Allwyn colony TSSPDCL Medchat. 5. The Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, Rep. by the Commissioner, Near Tank Bund, Hyderabad.

¶14

...RESPONDENTS

¶15

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue it a writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAIVUS directing the respondents 1 to 4 to receive application and to provide '1 5 new domestic meters to the residential House bearing No.2-51, admeasuring 90.0 Sq.yds., ot 75.24 Sq.meters, part of H.No. 2-51, admeasuring 73 Sq.yds., and house bearing No. 5-2-5111 , total admeasuring 292.0 Sq.yds., situated in Kukatpally Village, Kukatpally Mandal, Medchal lt/alkajgiri District and bounded by North: Neighbours Property, South: Neighbours Property, East: Neighbours Property, West: 20'-0" wide road and House belongs to G. Venkatesha. That the refusal to receive application and to provide 15 new domestic meters to the above referred^premises is illegal and arbitrary.

¶16

lA NO: 1 OF 2021

¶17

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

¶18

¶19

.,.r- ihe respondents I to 4 to receive application and to^{provide1 5 new domestic} meters, to the house^{bearing No.2-51' admeasuring 90'0 Sq'yds,or 7524} Sq.meters,^part of H.No. 2-51,^{admeasuring 73 Sq-yds., and house bearingNo' 5-2-} 51/1 , total admeasuring^{292.0 Sq.yds., situated in KukatpallyVillage, Kukatpally} Mandal, Medchal Malkajgiri^{Districtand bounded by North: Neighbours Property,} South: Neighbours Properly,^{East: Neighbours Property,West: 20-0wideroadand} House belongs to G. venkatesha.^{without being influenced by the fifth respondent,} pending disposal of main writ petition and deem fit and proper in the circumstance of the case.

¶20

Counsel for the Petitioner: M/S.^{THAKUR ROOPASINGH}

¶21

Counsel for the Respondent Nos.^{'l to 4: SRI R. VINODREDDY,} S.C. FOR T.S.S.P,D.C.L

¶22

Counsel for the Respondent No.5: SRI SAMPATH^{PRABHAKARREDDY,} S.C. FOR GHMC

¶23

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶24

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTTCE T.VINOD KUMAR

¶25

WRIT PETITION No.27347 OF 2021

¶26

ORDER:

¶27

This Writ Petition is filed for the following relief:

¶28

"...to issue a Writ order or direction more par.ticularly one in lhe nalure of Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents I to 4 lo receive application and to provide I5 new domestic meters to the residential house bearing No.2-51, admeasuring 90.0 sq. yds or 75.24 sq. meters part of H.No.2-51, admeasuring 73 sq. yards, and house bearing No.5-2-51/1, total admeasuring 292.0 sq. yards situated in Kukatpally village, Kukatpally Mandal, Medchal Malkajgiri District and bounded by North ; Neighbours property; South : Neighbours Property; East ; Neighbours property; West : 20'-0" wide road & House belongs to G.Venkatesha, that the refusal to receive application and to provide 15 new domestic meters without being inJluenced by the 5'h respondent, pending disposal of Writ Pelilion ....^'

¶29

Heard leamed counsel for petitioner, Sri R.Vinod Reddy, learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondent Nos.1 to 4 and Sri Sampath Prabhakar Reddy, leamed Standing Counsel appearing for 5th respondent. With the consent of all counsel, the Writ Petition is disposed of at the stage of admission itseif.

¶30

In this Writ Petition, the petitioner is aggrieved by the action of respondent Nos.2 and 3 in not receiving the application and releasing the power supply to the residential house of^{the petitionerbearing} No.2-51, admeasuring 90.0 sq. yds or 75.24 sq.^metersparl of H.No.2-51, admeasuring 73 sq. yards, and house bearing^No.5-2-51/1, 1n total admeasuring 292.0 sq.^yards situated Kukatpally village, Kukatpally Mandal, Medchal Malkajgiri District.

¶31

Learned counsel^{for petitioner stated that the respondent} authorities are not^{even receivingthe application madeby the} petitioner for releasing^{the power supply to the subjectpremises} belonging to the Petitioner.

¶32

Leamed Standing^{Counselfor respondentNos'2 and 3, on} instructions, has^{stated that if the petitionermakesan application,} again, the authorities^{will receivethe same and pass necessaryordet's} thereon, as per law.

¶33

In view of the^{above submissions,the petitioneris directed to} submit an application^{before respondentNos.2 and 3 seekingrelease} of the power supply,^{whichshali be received by the authoritiesand} necessary orders be^{passed thereon, strictlyas per law, as} expeditiously as^{possible.preferably, within a period of four weeks} from the date of receipt^{of a copy of this order.}

¶34

Accordingly, the Writ Petition^{is disposedof. No costs.}

¶35

The miscellaneous^{petitions pending, if any, sha1lstand closed'}

¶36

SD/.K.AM^MAJI ASSISTANT^REG ISTRAR ,TRUE^COPY//

¶37

¶38

SECTION^OFFICER

¶39

To, I The Chairmar relanoana State^{and Ltd', Managing ni"ii%"lL'-ii'lp6iale Director' Southern Power Distribution Company ofofice at 6-1-50' Mint Compouno'} -r HyOeribad^{5009963;--'..erinq.} operation Kukatpallv TSSPDoL - 2 ' "o pli'iii Jn'' x'ratparrv s u b^{Di vision} 3 +[! t ffi 'ji:'fr il E."ri.tJ:?" i'iY;.Yftl fi TSSPDCL. 4 .TheAssistant,DivislonalEngineeroP/AllwvncolgnyTSSPDCLMedchal. 5 The commis.ion"r,^{,,r"uili'iviJri6iarirtuhicipatcorporation,NearTank Buno'} 6 7 8 i,l} #Iiⁱ rillHr^{B?:3il#ktii :1%ffi 3'"'.?.} o1 0.One^{. Two CD CoPies.} SPare^CoPY

ts.

HIGH COURT

DATED:1 611112021

ORDER

I
I l rrf-- Slli r€
i
,):
oJ
3 0 N0iJ2CIzl
/;
.,//

¶46

WP.No.27347 af 202'l

¶47

DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS

¶48

Komarapu Tirupathi Rao v. The Southern Power Distribution Company of Telangana State Ltd. and 4 others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Komarapu Tirupathi Rao v. The Southern Power Distribution Company of Telangana State Ltd. and 4 others

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

Mohd. Abdul Shahid Vs The State of Telangana

Ganga Boina Yuv Raj Vs The Southern Power Distribution Company of Telangana State Ltd.

Mallikarjun Vs The State of Telangana and 5 others

Simra Constructions Vs The Southern Power Distribution Company of Telangana State Ltd.

Abdul Waseem Vs The State of Telangana

Sri R.Prudhvi Raju Vs The State of Telangana