Disposed

Gandhi Ponnam v. Telangana State Southern Power Distribution, Corporation Limited

Telangana HC18 Apr 2023WP/10494/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court disposed of a writ petition challenging the refusal to accept an application for an electricity connection. The petitioner was directed to make a fresh application within two weeks. The respondent authorities were directed to consider it and grant connection within two weeks upon receipt and necessary payment.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to make a fresh application within two weeks; respondents directed to consider and grant connection within two weeks of receipt.

Gandhi Ponnam Vs Telangana State Southern Power… — Service and Employment | Telangana HC (2023)

¶1

:-\

¶2

1321e1

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT^{FORTHE STATEOF TELANGANA} AT HYDERABAD (SPecial Original Jurisdiction)

¶4

TUESDAY, THE^{EIGHTEENTHDAY OF APRIL} TWO THOUSAND^{ANDTWENTY THREE}

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HONOURABLE^{SMTJUSTICEP. MADHAVIDEVI}

¶7

WRIT PETITION NO:^{'t0494 oF 2023}

¶8

Between:

¶9

Gandhi Ponnam, S/O. P.^{Krishna Rao Age. 50 yrs Occ. Business Fi/o. Plot} No. 460, Survey No.78,^{VenkataramanaColony,Gokul plots, Hafeezpet} village, Ranga Reddy District.

¶10

...PETITIONER

¶11

AND

¶12

Telangana State Southern Power Distribution,^{CorporationLimited,_Vidyut} Soudha Somaliguda, Hyderabad. Rep. by^its Chairman^{-ManagingDirector.}

¶13

2 The Superintending Engineer, Operation Cyber City, TSSPDCL,^Hyderabad

¶14

3 The Divisional Engineer, Operation Gachibowli TSSPDCL, Hyderabad.

¶15

4 The Assistant Divisional Engineer, Operation Chandanagar, TSSPDCL, Hyderabad.

¶16

5 The Assistant Engineer, Operation Vasanthnagar, TSSPDCL, Hyderabad

¶17

...RESPONDENTS

¶18

Petition under Article 226 of lhe 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 IVANDATMUS directing the respondents declaring the action of the respondents to accept application of the Petitioner and to provide electrical service connection to the petitioner in respect of the residential apartment in^plot bearing No. 460, in survey No. TB,admeasuring 197.0 Sq.yds.situated at Hafeezpet Village, Venkataramana Colony,(Gokul Plots) Serilingampally Mandal., bounded by North.25-0 wide road South. Plot No.451 East.40'-0 wide road West. Plot No. 459. That the refusal to provide electricity service connection to the above referred premises as illegal and arbitrary.

¶19

lA NO: 1 OF 2023

¶20

Petitron under Section¹ 51^{CPC praying that in the circumstancesstated} in the affidavit filed in support of the^{petition,the High Court may be pleasedto} direct the respondents to consider^the application^{of the Petitionerandprovide} electrical service connection to the^{petitioner residential apartment in plot} bearing No. 460, rn survey No.78, admeasuring^{'197.0Sq.yds., situaledat} Hafeezpet Village, Venkataramana^{Colony, (Gokul Plots)Serilingampally} lVlandal., bounded by North. 25'-0^{wideroad; South.Plot No. 45'1} ;^{East. 40'-0} wide road; West. Plot No. 459.

¶21

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI THAKUR^ROOPASINGH

¶22

Counsel for the Respondents:^{SRI R. VINOD REDDY, SC FORTSSPDCL}

¶23

The Court made the following:^ORDER

¶24

I I I I

¶25

THE HON'BLE^{SMT. JUSTICE P.MADHAVI DEVI}

¶26

IVRIT PETITION No.1O494 of2023

¶27

ORDER:

¶28

This Writ Petition is filed seeking a writ of mandamus declaring^the action oi thc respondents to accept application of the petitioner and to provide electrical service connection to the petitioner in respect of the residentjal aparlment in plot bearing No.460 in Survey No.78. admcast.rrinq 197-0 Sq.Yds., situated at Venkataramana Colony (Gokul Plots), Hafcezpet Village, Serilingampally Mandal bounded by North:25'-0 u,idr: r'ond; South:PIot No.45l ; Dast: 40'-0 wide road; West: Plot No.459 anC refiLscd ro provide elcctricity service connection to the above referred prcmrscs as illcgal and arbitrary and to pass such other order or orders.

¶29

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri R. Vinoci Redcty, Iearned Standing counsel for TSSPDCL appearing for respondents No.l to 5.

¶30

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that thc pctitioner had made an application to the respondents for providing electricity connccrion to the pctitioner's premises referred to above and the respondents refused to receive the same. Being aggrieved by the said action of the respondents in not rcceiving his application and in not providing electricity connection, the petilioncr has apDroached this Court.

¶31

¶32

PMD,,J W. P.No.10494 of 2023

¶33

¶34

4' Learned Standing counsel for TSSpDCL appcaring for respondents, on instructions, has stateci [hat if the petitior-rer approaches the respondents and makes an apprication afresh, the rcspondent authorities ',vould receive and consider the same in accordance ulth law.

¶35

5 Having regard to the abovc submission, the petitioner is directed to make a fresh application to the respondents, within a period of two (02) '"veeks^{from the date of receipt} of a copy of this order a.d on receipt of such application, the respondents ilre directecr to consider the same in accordance with law expeditiousir', prelerably 'r'iLhi. a pcriod of two (02) weeks there from, and grant nec.ssary clectricity connection as sought by the petitioner, on the petitioner maki,g necessary prtvmerlt as stipulated under the Electricit5. Act, 2003.

¶36

6 Accordingly, t}-re Writ Petition is disposed of at t hc admission stage There shall be no order as to costs

¶37

Miscellaneous applications, if any pencling, shall zrlsc.r stand closed

¶38

SD/.T.JAYASREE

¶39

ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ,TRUE COPY//

¶40

sEcrroN Srrrcen

¶41

To,

¶42

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

¶43

1. The Superintending Engineer, Operation Cyber City, TSSPDCL, Hyderabad. 3. The Divisional Engineer, Operation Gachibowli TSSpDCL, Hydera6ad. 4. The Assistant Divisionat Engineer, Operation Chandanagar, iSSpDCa, Hyderabad.

¶44

5 7.6. Al?i'i',:TAiifl^{tRr,-?dSli,,yft} L1IH,%T;,li3PP?!f^Hvou,,o.o o- fff 33 3;[i-^{vrNoD REDDY si;oA'i'stFi5Cl} ropucr

SW q

CC TODAY

HIGH COURT

DATED:1810412023

ORDER

WP.No.10494 of²⁰²³

l'.,''<br>.-:--{
:2
2 il iil 20n
i: ,j
'' ,/

¶53

DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS @c+t",

¶54

D 19

Gandhi Ponnam v. Telangana State Southern Power Distribution, Corporation Limited

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gandhi Ponnam 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/s.Bandi Rocks LLP Vs The State of Telangana

M/s Azra Plastics Industries Vs The Southern Power Distribution Company of Telangana Limited

Rahmath Banu Vs The State of Telangana and 3 others

Smt Maganti Sudha Vs The Telangana State Southern Power Distribution Company Limited

M/s Narayana Developers Vs The Southern Power Distribution Company of Telangana State Ltd.

V. Daman Kumar Vs The State of Telangana and 2 others