Disposed

Massimukku Anjaneyulu v. The State of Telangana and 3 Others

Telangana HC10 Mar 2022WP/12328/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of the writ petition directing the respondents to release an individual service connection to the petitioner within four weeks, subject to fulfilling TSSPDCL formalities and pending litigation conditions.

What did the court decide?

Directed the respondents to release individual service connection to the petitioner within four weeks, subject to formalities and pending litigation conditions.

Massimukku Anjaneyulu Vs The State of… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Telangana HC (2022)

¶1

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

¶2

THURSDAY, THE TENTH DAY OF^IUARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY TWO

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A.ABHISHEK REDDY

¶5

WRIT PETITION NO: 12328 OF 2022

¶6

Between:

¶7

It4assimukku Anjaneyulu, Sio Massimukku Ramakotaiah,^{Aged about60 years,} Occ. Business, R/o H. No.4-32-^11242, Saplagti^{Colony, Kukatpally, Hyderabad.}

¶8

...PETITIONER

¶9

AND

¶10

1 The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary,^{Power and Energy} Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad-500022.

¶11

2 Southern Power Distribution Company Ltd. of^{Telangana, Rep. by its} Chairman and Managing Director, Mint Compound,^Hyderabad.

¶12

3 Southern Power Distribution Company Ltd. of Telangana, Rep. by^its Divisional Engineer (operational), Kukatpally Division, Hyderabad.

¶13

Southern Power Distribution Company Ltd. of Telangana, Rep. by^its Asst. Divisional Engineer (operational) Madhapur, 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 an appropriate Writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus by declaring the action of the Respondents in not releasing the power supply with eight meters to the petitioner building premises bearing Plot No.10, in Sy.No.5B, admeasuring 472.55 sq yards, Situated at Baghameeri Village, Kukatpally Circle, Kukatpally Mandal, Medchal-lr/alkajgiri District as illegal, arbitrary, unjust and consequently direct the respondents to release the power supply with eight meters without any further delay.

¶16

lA NO: 1 OF 2022

¶17

Petition under Section 15'1 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the 3rd and 4th Respondents to release the power supply with eight meters

¶18

to the petitioner^premises Bearing Plot No.10, in Sy.No.58, admeasuring^472.55 sq yards, Situated at Baghameeri Village, Kukatpally Circle,^{KukatpallyMandal,} Medchal- Malkajgiri District.

¶19

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI B. MANOJ KUMAR

¶20

Counsel for the Respondent No.1 : GP FOR ENERGY

¶21

Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 2 to 4: SRI R. VINOD REDDY, SC FOR TSSPDCL

¶22

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶23

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A.ABHISHEK REDDY

¶24

¶25

WRIT PETITION No.12328 of 2022

¶26

ORDER:

¶27

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Energr appearing for respondent No.l and Sri R. Vinod Reddy, iearned Standing Counsel for Telangana State Southern Power Distribution Company Limited, appearing for respondent Nos.2 to 4.^With their consent, the Writ Petition is being disposed of at the^stage of admission itself.

¶28

When the matter is taken up for hearing, the learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the lis in^the present writ petition is squarely covered by the orders passed by this Court in W.P.No.22849 of 2018, dated^05.07.2018, W.P.No.21100 of 2019, dated 25.O9.2019, and^{W.P.No.7997 of} 2O2O, dated l.06.2020.

¶29

The above said submission is not disputed by the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent^{Nos.2 to 4} herein.

¶30

¶31

In view of the above and for the reasons alike in the orders referred to above, the present Writ Petition is disposed of directing the respondents to release individual service connection to the petitioner within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, subject to the petitioner fulfilling the other formalities and conclitions stipulated by TSSPDCL. The service connection so given shall be subject to further directions that may be issued by the State of Telangana or the Apex Court in the litigation pending before it arising out of the order, dated 12.O9.2072, in W.P.No.2O4O7 of 2008 & batch.

¶32

The miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. There sha11 be no order as to costs.

¶33

SD/. K.AMMAJI ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

/iTRUE COPY//

SECTION OFFICER

To,

The Principal Secretary,^{Powerand Energy Department, State of Telangana,} Secretariat, Hyderabad-500022.

¶39

ifre Cfriiimari and^{tvlanagingDirector, Southern Power Distribution Company} Ltd. of Telanoana, Mint Compound,^Hyderabad

¶40

J. ii.,e OluiiionSi Engineer^{(opdrational),-southernPower Distribution Company} Ltd. of Telanganal Kukatpally^{Division,Hyderaba-d.}

¶41

itie Ass;5ftni Divisional^{'Eneiineer(operaiional), Southern Power Distribution} Comoanv Ltd. of Telanqana,^{Madhapur, Hyderabad.}

¶42

tr One'CC io Sri^{B. ManoJKumar, Advocate} tOPqCl 6 i*; cajitcP toi endrgy,^{Hi€;h court for t!9} 91a1"^ 9l I^qlansana^[oUT] 7 one CC to Sri R. Vinod^{Raddy,SC for TSSPDCL} [OPUC] B Two CD Copies o One Soare Copv (Annei a copy'cif the order^passed in W.P. No.^{22849 of 2018)}

GJs/

HIGH COURT

DATED:1 010312022

ORDER

WP.No.12328^{of 2022}

¶48

1klE STAJ
c /., tr
d,g
4 APH 2022 i)
J- _). ,,/,,,
l
u. '-'.!y'

¶49

DISPOSING^{OF THE WRIT PETITION} WITHOUT^COSTS

¶50

\ 17-
t\
{A"

Massimukku Anjaneyulu v. The State of Telangana and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Massimukku Anjaneyulu v. The State of Telangana and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Varanasi Prashanth Vs The State of Telangana

Mudiraj Sangam (Muttarasi) Vs The State of Telangana

M/s. Akruthi Builders and Developers Vs The State of Telangana and 6 others

Kinnera Shyam, Vs The State of Telangana

Damgatla Lakshmanna , Golla Lakshmamma Vs P.Uday kumar

Madiraju Ram Koteswar Rao Vs The State of Telangana