Disposed

K. Prasad v. Southern Power Distribution Company Ltd., of Telangana

Telangana HC24 Aug 2023WP/23429/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a writ petition filed by a petitioner seeking a direction to Southern Power Distribution Company Ltd. to process his application for an electricity connection and release service connection with meters without further delay, citing an earlier order in a connected matter.

What did the court decide?

Direct respondents to consider petitioner's application dated 20.07.2023, provide power supply or pass appropriate orders within four weeks.

K. Prasad Vs Southern Power Distribution Company… — Service and Employment | Telangana HC (2023)

¶1

[³³⁰³ ]

¶2

¶3

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

¶4

THURSDAY, THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF^AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE J. SREENIVAS^RAO

¶7

WRIT PETITION NO: 23429 OF 2023

¶8

Between:

¶9

K. Prasad, S/o K. Sheshaiah, aged^{about 71 years, Occ. business, R/o Plot} No.61, Marthanda Nagar, Hafeezpet,^Hyderabad

¶10

...PETITIONER

¶11

AND

¶12

1 Southern Power Distribution^{CompanyLtd., of Telangana, rep. by its} Chairman and Managing Director,^{MintCompound, Hyderabad.}

¶13

2 Southern Power Distribution^{CompanyLtd., of Telangana, rep. by its} Superintending Engineer^{(operation) Cybercity, Hyderabad.}

¶14

J Southern Power Distribution^{Company Ltd.' of Telangana, rep. by its Asst} Divisional Engineer^{(Operational) Chanda Nagar, Hyderabad.}

¶15

...RESPONDENTS

¶16

Petition under Article 226 of the^{constitution of lndia praying that in the} circumstances stated in the^{affidavit filedtherewith,the High court may be} pleased to issue a writ, order or direction more^{particularly one in the natureof} writ of Mandamus by declaring the^{actionof the Respondentsin not processing} the applications for ielease^{of electricity connectionsto the petitioner'sbuilding} pr".i.". bearing Plot No.61, admeasuring^{400 sq yards in sy.No.B0, Situatedat} ivlarthanda Nagir, Hafeezpet^{Vuillage, SerilingampallyMandal, Ranga Reddy} District, now Medchal-Malkajgiri^{Districtas illegal arbitrary, unjustand} consequently direct the^{respondents to process applicationsfor providing} electricity connections and^{to release service connectionswithmeterswithout} any fu rther delay.

¶17

lA NO: 1 OF 2023

¶18

Petition under Section^{'151 CPC prayingthat in the circumstances stated} in the affidavit filed in support^{of the petition,the Highcourt maybe pleasedto} direct the 3rd Respondent to^{process applications for providingelectricity} connections and to release^{serviceconnectionswith meters to the petitioner's} building^premises bearing^{Plot No.6'1} ,^{admeasuring400 sq yards in sy No B0,}

¶19

Situated at Marthanda^{Nagar'Hafeezpet Vuillage,SerilingampallyMandal'} Ranga Reddy District,^{now Medchal-Malkajgiri District}

¶20

Counsel for the Petitioner:^{SRI L. VISHNU PRASAD}

¶21

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

¶22

The Court made the^{following:ORDER}

¶23

¶24

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE J.SREENIVAS RAO

¶25

WRIT PETITION No.23429 of 2023

¶26

ORDER:

¶27

This writ petition is filed seeking the following reliel

¶28

"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 processing the applications for release of electricity connections to the petitioner's building premises bearing Plot No.61, admeasuring 4O0 sq.yards in sy.No.80, Situated at Marthanda Nagar, Hafeezpet Village, Serilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, now Medchal Malkajgiri District as illegal, arbitrary, unjust and consequently direct the respondents to process applications for providing electricity connections and to release service connections with meters without any further delay."

¶29

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri R.Vinod Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for TSSPDCL appearing for respondent Nso.l to 3.

¶30

[t is represented by learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner ancl learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents that the present writ petition is squarely covered by the order of this Court dated 28.04 .2O23 passed in W.P.No. 12705 of 2023, Lrcnce, Lhe writ petition could be disposed of in terms of the

¶31

¶32

¶33

order of this Court dated 28.04.2O23 passed in W.P.No. 12705 ot 2023

¶34

Brining the said submission of both the learncd counscl on record, the writ petition is disposed of directing the respondenLs to consider the petitioner's application daLed 2O.O7.2O23 as per law, provide power supply or pass appropriate orders on the application filed by the petitioner and communicate the decision to the petitioner, within a period of four (04) weeks from thc date of receipt of copy of this order. However, there shall be no order as to costs.

¶35

Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this writ petition shalI stand closed.

¶36

SD/- B. SARAS THI ASSISTANT REGIS AR

//TRUE COPY//

SECTION FICER

t To,

1 The Cheirman and Mana-ging Directo.r, Southern power Distribution Company Ltd., of Telangana, Mint Compound, Hyderabad.

¶41

2 The Superintending Engineer (operatidn) Southern power Distribution Company _Ltd-, of Telangana. Cybercity, Hyderabad.

¶42

J The Asst. Divisional Engineer (Operatibnai) Southern power Distribution Company Ltd., of Telangana, Chanda Naqar, Hvderabad.

¶43

1. One CC to SRt L. VTSHNU PRASAD, Adv:ocate'[OpUC] 5. one cc to sRt R. vtNoD REDDY, sc FoR TSSpDCL'topucl f) Two CD Copies BN LS

.11
'r

HIGH COURT

DATE D:24 10812023

ORDER

WP.No.23429 of 2023

t)i( '
/ r.. .i / -l u ,.'
U ,5 stP i@ (,
i_'
': - r,.r)'''l' .i 1
,-

¶51

DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS a

¶52

@uP' Eo

¶53

THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE P.MADHAVI DEVI

¶54

WRIT PETITION No.127O5 of 2023

¶55

ORDER

¶56

This Writ Petition is filed seeking alvrit of mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in not processing the application for release of electricily connection to the petitioner's building premises bearing PIot No.55, admeasuring 200 Sq.yds. in Sy.No.g0, situated at Aditya Nagar, 'B' Block, situated at New Hafeezpet Village, Serilingampally I,Iandal, Ranga Redd-v District, now MedchalMalkajgiri Districr, as illegal and arbitrary and consequently to direct the respondents to process the application for providing the electricity connections zLnd to release power supply without any further clelay and to pass such other order or orders.

¶57

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Government Pleader for Enerry appearing for respondent No.1, Sri R.Vinod Reddy, learncd Standing Counsel for TSSpDCL appearing for respondents No.2 and 3, and the Writ Petition is disposed of at admission stage with the consent ol all the parties_

¶58

Learned counsel for the petitioncr submitted that the petitioner is the owr-rer of tlte property be:rring plot No.55, admeasuring 200 Sq.Yds. in Sy.No.SO, situated at Aditya Nagar,^,B, Block, situated at New Hafeezpet Village, Serilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, nov; Medchal- Niali<ajgiri District vide Agrcement of Sale dated

i,\1i)^l \' P ^v

17 .Ol.2O1.I and the^{petitioner had appliedfordomesticelectricity} connection to^{rhe saiclpropertyvideacknorvledgmentdated} 21 .O1.2023 to^{the respondentsBut as on this datc' the resl)ond(rnts} have not considered^{and given any power supply to the petitioner,} u,hich is contrarl' to^{Section 43 of the Electric:tv Act' 2003 ancl} requested to direct^{therespondentstoconsidcr thepctitioner's} application^{and passappropriate orders'}

¶63

In view of the^{same, thc Writ Petition isdi'cposc(l of attht-} admission stage^{directing the respondents to considerthe applic:rtion} liled by the^{petitioner dated21'04 2023 as pcr law' :itrdDrovidcpo'"ver} supply or^{pass appropriatc orderson thc appli'ation filrid b. tho} petitioner, within^{four(4) weeks from the date of rccciptof copy of this} order. There shall^{be no order as to costs'}

¶64

Miscellaneous aPPlications, if any^pendrng, shall^{also stand} closed.

¶65

JUSTICE P.MADHAVI^DEVI

¶66

Darc. 28.O4 .2023 PRN

K. Prasad v. Southern Power Distribution Company Ltd., of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K. Prasad v. Southern Power Distribution Company Ltd., 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Inayath Baig, Vs The State of Telangana

P Sathaiah, Warangal. Vs the State of Ts.,I and Cad.,Hyderabad, and 2 Otrs.

Smt M. Shamantha D/o M Narsimlu Vs State of Telangana Rep by its Principal Secretary Home

Thota Venkatesham Vs Southern Power Distribution Company Ltd. of Telangana

K. Ushasree Vs The State of Telangana

Narra Priyanka Reddy Vs The State of Telangana