Allowed

Dr. K. Ravindranath v. Telangana State Southern Power Distribution Corporation Limited

Telangana HC31 Dec 2021WP/37148/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of Writ Petition No. 37148 of 2021, following previous orders in W.P. Nos. 26401 of 2021 and 21100 of 2019. The court directed respondents to receive the petitioner's application and release the power supply connection within four weeks.

What did the court decide?

Directed respondents to receive application and release power supply within four weeks, subject to pending State/Apex Court litigation.

Dr. K. Ravindranath Vs Telangana State Southern… — Service and Employment | Telangana HC (2021)

¶1

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

¶2

FRIDAY,THE THIRTY FIRST DAY OF DECEIUBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY ONE

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T.VINOD KUMAR

¶5

WRIT PETITION NO: 37148 OF 2021

¶6

Between:

¶7

Dr. K. Ravindranath, S/o K. Chandrasekhara Rao, aged about 69 years, Occ: Doctor, Rl/o 2-1 -390 I 1 1, Nallakunta, Hyderabad.

¶8

...PETITIONER

¶9

AND

¶10

1 Telangana State Southern Power Distribution Corporation Limited, Vidyuth Soudha, Somajiguda, Hyderabad Rep. by its Chaiiman-cum-Managing[ Director.

¶11

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

¶12

aJ The Divisional Engineer, Telangana State Southern Power Distribution Corporation Limited, Vidyuth Soudha, Kukatplly, Hyderabad.

¶13

4 The Asst. Divisional Engineer, Telangana State Southern power Distribution Corporation Limited, Ayyappa Society, Madhapur, Hyderabad.

¶14

5 Greater Hydera.bad Municipal Corporation, Hyderabad Circle, Tank Bund, Rep. by its Commissioner.

¶15

...RESPONDENTS

¶16

Petition under Article 226 oI 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 writ of [,4andamus declaring the action of the Respondents in not receiving the application form and not releasing the power supply to the petitioner House Bearing plot No.176 in Sy.No.SP 6P 7P, admeasuring 620 sq yards, Situated at Guttala Begumpet Village, serilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District as illegal, null, void, arbitrary and consequently direct the respondents to release the power supply without being influenced by the instructions of the sth respondent.

¶17

lA NO: 1 OF 2021

¶18

Petition under section 151 cpc praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fired in support of the petition, the High court may be preased ro direct the Respondents 1 to 4 to receive the apprication form and rerease the power suppry to the petitioner House Bearing prot No.176 in sy.No.5p 6p 7p, admeasuring 620 sq yards, Situated at Guttara Begumpet viilage, seriringampaily Mandar, Ranga Reddy District.

¶19

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI B. MANOJ KUMAR

¶20

Counsel for the Resg ondent Nos. 1 to 4: SRI R. VINOD REDDY,S,3 FOR TSSPDCL

¶21

Counsel for the Resl ondent Nos. 5: SRI SAMPATH PRABHAKAR REDDY,SC FOR GHMC

¶22

The Court made the^' rllowing: ORDER

¶23

¶24

HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T.VINOD KUMAR

¶25

WRIT PETITION No.3714 8 of 2O2l

¶26

ORDDR;

¶27

This Writ Petition is filed aggrieved by the inaction of the respondents in receiving the application and releasing the power supply to the petitioner,s house constructed in plot No. 176 in Sy.No.SP, 6P and 7p admeasuring 620 sq. yards situated at Guttala Begumpet Village, Serilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District.

¶28

When the matter is taken up, it is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the issue raised in the present Writ Petition is squarely covered by the orders passed by this Court in Wp.No.264Ot of 2O2t dt.25.10.202 I and WP.No.2 1 100 of 2019 dt.25.09.2Or9.

¶29

Sri R. Vinod Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for Telangana State Power Distribution Company Limited appearing for respondents I to 4 and Sri Sampath prabhakar Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, appearing for respondent No.5, do not dispute the aforesaid submission.

¶30

4, In view of the above, and for reasons alike in the said order, this Writ Petition is disposed of directing the respondents to receive the application of the petitioner and release service connection to the petitioner within a period of four (4) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, and the same shall be subject to further direction that mav be

¶31

..^,

¶32

issued by he State of Telangana or the Ape x C ourt in tl.re litigation r rending before it arising out of the order dt.l2.O9.2C 12 in Writ Petition No.20407 of 2C0B and batch No costs.

¶33

5 Conse luently, miscellaneous petitrons pr:nding, if anr,, sha1l stand :losed.

¶34

SD/. K, AMMAJI ASSIST,\NT REGISTRAR

,TRUE COPY//

tt-

SE,CTION OFFICER

To,

The Chairman-c rm-Managing Director, Telangana State Scuthern Power Distribution Corl cration Limited, Vidyuth Soudha, Somajiguda,'lyderabad.

¶40

¶41

The Superintenc ng Engineer, Telangana State Southern Powei' Distribution Corporation Lim ed, Vidyuth Soudha, Somajiguda, Hyderabad.

¶42

The Divisional E rgineer, Telangana State Southern Power Distribution Corporation Limi ed, Vidyuth Soudha, Kukatplly, Hyderabad

¶43

The Asst. Divisic tal Engineer, Telangana State Southern Power Distribution Corporation Limi ed, Ayyappa Society, Madhapur, Hyderabad.

¶44

The Commissior rr, Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, Hyderabad Circle, Tank Bun l.

¶45

One CC to SRl. t^I MANOJ KUMAR, Advocate [OPUC]

¶46

One CC to SRI F VINOD REDDY, SC FOR TSSPDCL IOPLTC]

¶47

One CC to SRI S cMPATH PRABHAKAR REDDY, SC^{FOR 3Hl/C} [OPUC]

¶48

Two CD Copies.

¶49

10.One spare copy.

¶50

1 t

¶51

( Along with the order c( py dated 25.1O.2021 in W.P.No. 26401 of^{i1021and dated} 25.09.2019 inW.P.No. 1'1 100 of 2019)

¶52

NPJ \ V

HIGH COURT

TVKJ

DATED:311121^,-021

ORDER

WP.No.37148 o12021

HE S )41
+
i
ta 0 6 JAI, 20:12 t
:
,:. ,!'/

¶59

DISPOSING OF THE WRIT^PETITION WITHOUT COS"S. / o*s

¶60

TTIE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE T. VINOD KUMAR

¶61

WRIT PETITION No.264Ol OF 2O2l

¶62

ORDER:

¶63

This Writ Petition is filed for the following relief:

¶64

"... to issue an appropriate Writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to act in accordance with law and to provide service connections along with electrical metres to the building constructed on Plot bearing No.879, admeasuring 333 Sq. Yards in Sy. No.1 1ll4 to l1l18 Part of Sy. No.l I situated in Sri Swamy Ayyappa Cooperative Housing Society Limited, Khanamet village, Serilingampally Mandal, R.R. District, without being influenced by the instructions of the 5'r' respondent. . ..."

¶65

When the matter is taken up, it is submitted by the learned Counsel for the petitioner that the issue raised in the present Writ Petition is squarely covered by the order dated25.09.2019 passed by this Court in W.P. No.21 I 00 of 201 9.

¶66

Learned Government Pleader appearing for Energy/respondent No.1, Sri R. Vinod Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for Telangana State Power Distribution Company Limited appearing for respondents 2 to 4 and, Sri Sampath Prabhakar Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, appearing for respondent No.5, do not dispute the aforesaid submission.

¶67

In view ofthe above, for the reasons alike in the said order, this Wril Petition is disposed of directing the respondents to release individual service connection to the petitioner within a period of four (4) weeks lrom the date of receipt of a copy of this order, and the

¶68

same shall be subject to^{further directionthat may be issuedby the} State of Telan Iana^{or the Apex Court in the litigationpending before} it arising out c'f the order^{dated 12.09.2012in Writ Petition No'20407} of 2008 and ba tch.^{No costs.}

¶69

Miscellt oeous^{petitions pending if any,shall stand closed'}

(T. VINoD KUMAR,^J)

Date:25.10.2{ 21.

MRIiR

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A.RAJASHEKER REDDY WRIT PETITION No.211oo OF 2019

¶74

ORDER:

¶75

This writ petition is filed aggrieved by action of respondents 1n not receiving the application and not releasing the power supply to the petitioner's house at premises bearing Plot No.350, admeasuring 417 squa.re yards in Sy.No.lIl14 to 11118 situated at Khanamet Village, Serilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District.

¶76

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in similar circumstances, this Court disposed of WP.No.22849 of 2018, dated 05-07-2O18.

¶77

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.

¶78

In view of the satne, 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 respondentCompany is directed to provide individual service connection to the petitioner within a period of four weeks from the date of submission of such application and

¶79

¶80

provision o[ such^{power supply} "snnssfion^{shaIl be} subject to^{jurther direction that may be issued by the} State of Tekmgana^{or the Supreme Court in the litigation} pending b:fore^{itarising out of thejudgment} dated 12-0tt-2O12^{in WP'No'2O4O7of 2008 and batch'} Pending^{mj scellaneous applications if any shall stand} closed.

¶81

A.RAJASHEKER^REDDY'J

¶82

25-O9-2019 Nv1

Dr. K. Ravindranath v. Telangana State Southern Power Distribution Corporation Limited

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dr. K. Ravindranath v. Telangana State Southern Power Distribution Corporation Limited

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

Sri Sai Krupa Catering and Maintenance Services, Vs The State of Telangana

Sri Sai Krupa Catering and Maintenance Services, Vs The State of Telangana

Smt. Koduri Nagamani Vs The State of Telangana

Butti Raju Vs The State of Telangana

J. Narsimha Yadav Vs Telangana State Southern Power Distribution Corporation Limited

Ch.Sathi Babu Vs State of Telangana