Dismissed

Dr. Aruna v. State of Telangana

Telangana HC9 Aug 2023WP/21430/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court disposed of a writ petition seeking direction to respondents to release high tension electricity supply to a residential building without insisting on an occupancy certificate. The court directed release of supply subject to petitioner's compliance with rules and furnishing an undertaking to produce the certificate within a prescribed period.

What did the court decide?

Direction to release HT electricity supply without insisting on occupancy certificate, upon petitioner furnishing undertaking to produce it within prescribed time.

Dr. Aruna Vs State of Telangana — Service and Employment | Telangana HC (2023)

¶1

132s21

¶2

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶3

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE NINTH DAY OF AUGUSI TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE SUREPALLI NANDA

¶7

WRIT PETITION NO: 21430 OF 2023

¶8

Between:

¶9

AND

¶10

Dr. Aruna, Wo Dr. Ch. tvlallikarjun Aged about 25 years, Occ. Doctor R/o H. No. 1-7-43-4571206, Aruna Hospital Mahesh Nagar, ECIL Post, Kapra Medchal Malkajgiri District

¶11

...pErroNER

¶12

State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary Energy, Telangana Secretariat, Hyderabad-500022

¶13

Southern Power Distribution Company Of T.S. Limited, T.S. Transco Buildino Somajiguda, Hyderabad, Rep. its Managing Director, T.S.GENCO

¶14

.2 The Chief General Manager, Operations, TSSPDCL, Medchal Zone Mint Compound, Hyderabad

¶15

Assistant Divisional Engineer, O/o Superintendant Engineer, operation Circle TSSPDCL, A.S.Rao Nagar,Hyderabad

¶16

5 Assistant Engineer, Operations, TSSPDCL A.S.Rao Nagar,Hyderabad

¶17

Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, Sixth floor Municifal Office Complex Tartk-Bond Road, Hyderabad Rep by its Additional Chief City Planner

¶18

...RES''NDENTS

¶19

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 a Writ, order or direction, more particularly one in the nature of a Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the third Respondent in not releasing high tension HT electricity supply to the residential building in Plot Nos. 216 and 217 in Survey Number 317 Pat7,31B Part, 457 and 458 part situated at Mahesh Nagar under Kapra Municipality, Keesara Mandal under A.S. Rao Nagar Sub Division in Sainikpuri Division of Habsiguda Circle, as arbitrary, unjust, set aside the same and consequently, direct the Respondents to release electricity supply to the entire building in vide estimate No. E-2022- 14-03-12-01-010 without insisting upon occupancy certificate from the sixth respondent

¶20

¶21

lA NO: 1 OF 2023

¶22

Petition under Section 151 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 third respondent to releasing HT electricity supply with regard to vide estimate No. E-2022-14-03-'12-01-010 to the residential building in Plot Nos.216 and217 in Survey Number 317 ParL, 318 Part, 457 and 458^part situated at lt4ahaesh Nagar under Kapra tvlunicipality, Keesara lvlandal under A.S.Rao nagar Sub Division in Sainikptri Division of Habsiguda Circle rvithout insisting for occupancy certificate pending disposal of the above Writ Petition

¶23

Counsel for the Petitioner: SMT. K. V. RAJASREE

¶24

Counsel for Respondent No. 1: GP FOR ENERGY

¶25

Counsel for Respondent Nos.2 to 5: SRI R. VINOD REDDY, SC FOR TSSPDCL

¶26

Counsel for Respondent No. 6: SRI M. DURGA PRASAD

¶27

The Gourt made the following: ORDER

¶28

¶29

HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE SUREPALLI NANDA

¶30

WRIT PETITION No.21430 of 2023

¶31

ORDER:

¶32

Heard Smt. K.V.Rajasree, learned Counse! appearing on behalf of petitioner, learned Government Pleader for Energy appearing on behalf of Respondent No.1, Mr.R.Vinod Reddy, Learned Standing Counsel for TSSPDCL, appearing on behalf of respondent Nos.z to 5 and of Sri M.Durga Prasad, learned Standing Counsel for GHMC appearing on behalf of Respondent No.6.

¶33

PERUSED THE RECORD

¶34

The limited relief sought for by ihe petitioner is a direction to the Respondents to provide the high tension HT electricity supply connection to the residential building in Plot Nos.216 and 217 in Survey No.317 Part,31B Part, 4-57 and 458 part situated at Mahesh Nagar under Kapra Municipality, Keesara tvlandal under A.S Rao Nagar Sub Division in Sainikpuri Division of Habsiguda Circle and consequently direct the respondents to release electricity supply to the entire building vide estimate No.E-2022-14-03-12-01-010

¶35

¶36

without insisting upon occupancy certificate From ther sixth respondent.

¶37

The case of the petitioner is that respondents cannot stop the release of power supply only on the ground of nonsubmission of occupancy certificate, which uras delayed by the concerned authority and the petitioner is ready and willing to submit undertaking to produce the occupancy certificate immediately after the receipt of the same. The petitioner is facing hardship due to non release of the power supply to the petitio n er's bu ilding.

¶38

When the matter is taken up for hearing, it is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner-that the issue involved in this writ petition is squarely covered by the order passed by this Court in W.p.No.40894 of 2018, W.p.No.34692 of 2OtB, W.P.No.3710I of 2Ot7 and W.p.No.4B2O of 2020 and the same is not disputed by the learned Standing Counsel for TSSPDCL appearing on behalf of Respondents.

¶39

Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions made by both the learned counsel on record and for the reasons alike in .the above referred order passed by this Court in w.p.No.40Bg 4 0f 2018,

¶40

¶41

W.P.No.34692 oF 2018, W.P.No,37101 oF 2017 and

¶42

W.P.No.482B of 2020, the Writ^petition is disposed of at the admission stage directing the respondents to release the high tension HT power supply to the subject premises of the petitioner's residential building in PIot Nos.216 and 2L7 in Survey No.317 Part, 318 Part, 457 and 458 part situated at Mahesh Nagar under Kapra Municipality, Keesara Mandal under A.S Rao Nagar Sub Division in Sainikpuri Division of Habsiguda Circle, upon the petitioner, complying with the required terms and conditions as per rules in force, and upon the petitioner furnishing an undertaking to produce the occupancy certificate from the Municipal Corporation concerned, within a prescribed period and if no such occupancy certificate is produced by the petitioner within such prescribed time, it is open to the respondents to take appropriate action, ilt accordance to law. However, there shall be no Order as tO costs.

¶43

Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed.

¶44

SD/. P. PADMANABHA REDDY -/ASSISTANT REG.ISTRAR //TRUE COPY// , ,ul SECTION TRCTR

¶45

To, 1. The Principal Secretary Energy, State of Telangana, Telangana Secretariat, Hyderabad-500022

¶46

The lVanaging Director, Southern Power Distribution Company Of T.S. Limited, T.S. Transco Building Somaliguda, Hyderabad, T.S.GENCO

¶47

The Chief General Manager, Ooerations, TSSPDCL, Medchal Zone Mint Compound, Hyderabad

¶48

The Assistant Divisional Engineer. O/o Superintendant Engineer, operation

¶49

\ Circle TSSPDCL, A.S.Rao Nagar,Hyderabad

¶50

The Assistant Engineer, Operations, TSSPDCL A.S.Rao Nagar,Hyderabad 6. The Additional Chief City PIanner, Greater Hyderabad tt/unicipal Corporation, Sixth floor Municipal Office Complex Tank-Bond Road, Hyderabad.

¶51

One CC to Smt. K V Rajasree Advocate [OPUC]

¶52

Two CCs to GP For Energy ,Hiirh Court for the State of Telangana. [OUT]

¶53

One CC to Sri R. Vinod Reddy, SC for TSSPDCL (OPUC)

¶54

10.One CC to Sri M. Durga Prasad, Advocate(OPUC) 1 1 . Two CD Copies

¶55

MBC GJP \ k-

HIGH COURT

I I

DATED:^0910812023

a::l iiF- Si.47
. \r:)].
)$
t
17 AUB 2[a
:.
ORDER

¶60

WP.No.21430^{of 2023}

¶61

DISPOSING^{OF THE \A'RIT PETITION}

¶62

WITHOUT COSTS

¶63

.{$9

Dr. Aruna v. State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dr. Aruna v. State of Telangana

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

Danda Santhosh Vs The Southern Power Distribution Company Tg Ltd.

M/S. Gilpra Infra Private Limited Vs Telangana State Southern Power Distribution, Corporation Limited

Paranandi Sanjeeva Rao Vs The Registrar Osmania University

Guduru Narender Reddy Vs The Chairman and Managing Director

Ananya Manchikatla Vs Kaloji Narayana Rao Health University

Saanvi Developers Vs The Southern Power Distribution Company of Telangana State Ltd.