Disposed

Ravula Sahadev v. The Southern Power Distribution Company of Telangana State Ltd.

Telangana HC19 Aug 2023WP/22525/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition filed for a mandamus to direct power authorities to provide electricity connection to petitioner's residential plots. The High Court disposed of the petition noting a related pending order, directing supply subject to occupancy certificate compliance while reserving the question of costs.

What did the court decide?

Respondents to provide power supply to premises subject to compliance of terms and conditions and petitioner furnishing an undertaking to produce Occupancy Certificate from Respondent No. 6 within pre

Ravula Sahadev Vs The Southern Power Distribution… — Landlord and Tenant | Telangana HC (2023)

¶1

[^32s21

¶2

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

¶3

SATURDAY. THE NINETEENTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MRS JUSTICE SUREPALLI NANDA

¶6

wRlT PETITION NO: 22525 OF 2023

¶7

Between:

¶8

Ravula Sahadev, S/o Late. T. Beerappa, Age- 52 years, Occ: Business, R/o. Plot No. 75,76 and 77 Pan Sai Nagar Colony, Medipally, Chengicherla, Medchal-Malkajgiri District.

¶9

...PETITIONER

¶10

AND

¶11

1 The Southern Power Distribution Company of Telangana State Ltd, Rep. by its Chairman and Managing Director having its Corporate office at 6-1-50, Mint Compound, Hyderabad 500063.

¶12

The Superintending Engineer, Operation Habsiguda Circle, T S S P D C L, Habsiguda.

¶13

3 The Divisional Engineer, Operation Keesara Division TSSPDCL.

¶14

4 The Assistant Divisional Engineer, Operation Ghatkesar, Sub-Division TSSPDCL,

¶15

The Assistant Engineer, SE/O/RR East AE OP Narapally TSSPDCL.

¶16

Hyderabad Metropolitan Development Authority, Diskict Commercial

¶17

Complex, Administrative^'L' Block, Tarnaka, Hyderabad.

¶18

...RESPONDENTS

¶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 io issue writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS directing the respondents 1 to 5 to^provide electricity connection to the residential building, the^plot bearing No.75, admeasuring 244 Sq.yds.,^Plot No. 76, admeasu(ing 300 Sq.yds., and^plot No. 77 Part, admeasuring 28 Sq.yds., total admeasuring 572 Sq.yds., in Survey No. 29, situated at Medipally^Village, Peerzadiguda Municipality, Medipally Mandal, Medchal-Malkajgiri District., and bounded by North: Plot No. 77 Parl: South: 25' wide road; East: Plot Nos.^74, 73, 72 part, West: 30'wide road. Without insisting upon occupancy Certificate^from the 6lh respondent by holding that the refusal to^provide electricity^{connectionto the} above referred^premtses as illegal and arbitrary.

¶20

lA NO: 1 OF 202:\

¶21

Petitron r ndt:r le rction 151 CPC praying that in tl-e circut'rst.rnces stated in the affrda,rrt f leri n st oporl of the petition the High Court may b:r pl:ased to direct the respcrdcntl 1 lo 'l to provide electricity connection to the r(,,sidential building, the plot beanng l'.Jc. 5 aCmeasurrng 244 Sq yds., Plot No. 73, adrneasuring 300 Sq.yds. and plrt I'lo^'7 Part, adnreasuring 28 Sq.yds ., totir] adrreasuring 572 Sq.yds , rn Survr:v l,,lc 2 9 situated at Medipally Village, [)eerztrd gu<la Municipality Medipally Mandal. l,4e lr:hal-Malkalgrri District., and bounded b7 l.lor:h: Plot No. 77 Part; South 25 vticle^rcac. East Plot Nos 74,73,72 part; V/est. 30'wide road. Without insistingl upor occupancy certificate from 6th reslondenr pe rding disposal of main writ petitrcn ar d deem fit and proper rn the circunstanc: of tlte case.

¶22

Counsel for the Petiti rr er: SMT. THAKUR ROOPA SINCiH Counsel for the Resp rrdent Nos.1 TO 5: SRI R.VINOD REDDY. SC FOR TSSPDCL

¶23

Counsel for the Resp rndent No.6: M/s. D.MADHAVI, SC FOR HMDA

¶24

The Court at the adm ss,ion stage made the following: ORDEII

¶25

¶26

HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE SUREPALLI NANDA

¶27

WRIT PETITION No.22525 OF 2O23

¶28

ORDER:

¶29

Heard learned counse! for the petitioner, Sri R.Vinod Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for TSSPDCL appearing for respondent Nos.1 to 5 and Ms.D.Madhavi, learned Standing Counsel for HMDA appearing for respondent No.6.

¶30

The petitioner approached the Court seeking the prayer as follows:

¶31

"To issue writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS directing the respondents 1 to 5 to provide electricity connection to the residential building, the plot bearing No.75 admeasuring 244 Sq.yds., Plot No.76 admeasuring 300 Sq.yds and plot No.77 Part admeasuring 28 Sq.yds total admeasuring 572 Sq.yds in Survey No 29 situated at Medipally Village, Peerzadiguda Municipality, Medipally Mandal, Medchal-Malkajgiri District and bounded by North: Plot^{No.77 Part;} South: 25'wide road; East: Plot Nos,74, 73,^{72 part;} West: 3O wide road. Without insisting^{uponOccupancy} Certificate from the 6th respondent by^holding that the refusal to provide electricity^connection to the^above

¶32

I /

¶33

¶34

|e ferr rc premises as illegal and arb trary arnd pass :;Lrc1^,r,ler or orders as this Hon'ble^(lourt .ler.rs Fit .rnd p oper in the circumstances of the cas3,'

¶35

It is rr:presented by both learnecl corrn iel for the petitionor rr d learned Standing Counsel br'^'fSSPDCL appearing fr^,r respondent Nos.1 to 5 that the s,u blect issue in the prt:sert , rit petition is squarely cover,ld by i.he order of this Court d, rtr:d 14.08.2023 passed in W.P.No..l .t 90 of 2023, hence, tht: vrit petition could be disposed of ir tr..rms of the order of thrs Court dated 14.08.2023 passe,l in !/.^).No.21890 of 202:-

¶36

4, Bringir g the said submission of both Iearne d counsel on record, tl€) ,'rit petition is disposed of at the adrr i!;sioir stage, directing the r:spondents to provide the power:iurrpl')/ to the premises of lhe petitioner, subject to the r:omp izrncr: of the terms and c rrditions and upon the petitioner f Jrnisiing an undertakinE t,) produce the Occupancy Certifi,:at,= from respondent llo.6 within a prescribed perio,l an<l f rro such Occupancy C ertificate is produced within s uch l(. riod, it is open to th( respondents to take apprc priat()' action in accordance v^rt r law. However, there shall tre no c,rde r as to CoStS.

¶37

5r)

¶38

Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this Writ

¶39

Petition, sha Il stand closed.

¶40

//TRUE COPY//

¶41

SD/-A.V.S. PRASAD ASSISTANI.REGISTRARqD

¶42

SECTION OFFICER

¶43

To 1. The Chairman^{and Managing Director havingits Corp-orate.office-at6-1-50'} S6rtn.* F"wer^{Distribution-Companyof Telangana State Ltd, Mint} Compound,^{HYderabad 500063.}

¶44

z it'" Srp."i^{i"hoing rngin"er,operationHabsigudaCircle'T S S P D c L} Habsiguda.-O'ivislonal

¶45

S. ine Engineer. Operation Keesara^{Division TSSPDCL}

¶46

- in" Ari"irnt^{Divisional Erigineer, OperationGhatkesar Sub-Division} TSSPDCL

¶47

s ih" hislstrnt^{Engineer, SE/O/RR East.AE OP NarapallyTSSPDCL,} 6 Hvderabad Metrobolitan^{Development Authority, Dlstflct uommerclal}

¶48

C6rpfe*. Adminiitrative L Block, Tarnak-a,.Hyderabad'

¶49

7 o;;'CC io SMr.^{THAKURRooPA SINGH,Advocatet-O-P-Vg^l-}

¶50

b o;; cc to snt^{R.vtNoDREDDY, sc FoR TSSPDC^L[oPUC]}

¶51

e. On" CC to^{M/s D MADHAVI,SC FOR HMDA[OPUC]}

¶52

Two CD CoPies PS * s'---

CC TODAY

HIGH COURT

DATED:1 9108t?.023

ORDER

WP.No.22525 ctf 2023

-.-: . ::.:*..
., l. '.:-: a,
/
^( <br>'i
I
( 1 rffi ?SB

¶60

DISPOSING^()F THE WRIT PETITION AT THE ADM SSION STAGE WITHOUT CC STS.

¶61

i5
o+

Ravula Sahadev v. The Southern Power Distribution Company of Telangana State Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ravula Sahadev v. The Southern Power Distribution Company of Telangana State Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kasturi Lakshmareddy Vs The State of Telangana

Matam Eshwaraiah, Vs The State of Telangana

Smt. Sudireddy Vijaya Laxmi, Vs The State of Telangana.

M/s. Jeevaka Industries Pvt. Ltd., Vs A.P. Electricity Regulatory Commission

Syed Zaker Vs Union of India

Mohd Akber Vs Southern Power Distribution Company Ltd.