Dismissed

Smt. Poreddy Satyavathi v. Northern Power Distribution Company of A.P. Ltd.

Telangana HC8 Aug 2023WP/6735/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Telangana High Court dismissed Writ Petition No. 6735 of 2013 filed by Smt. Poreddy gatlavathi seeking a writ of mandamus against power distribution companies for not releasing a new service connection. On counsel's representation that the cause of action does not survive, the court held the petition infructuous.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition dismissed as infructuous. No order as to costs.

Smt. Poreddy Satyavathi Vs Northern Power… — Writ and Judicial Review | Telangana HC (2023)

¶1

13"52 |

¶2

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

¶3

TUESDAY, THE EIGHTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MRS JUSTTCE SUREPALLI NANDA

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO: 6735 OF 2013

¶7

Between:

¶8

Smt. Poreddy gatlavathi, Wio: Gopal Reddy, Aged about 58 years, House wife, Ryo 5-160, Fourth Lane, Srinagar Cotony, Kothagudeni, Khimmam District- Represented by her General^power of Atiomey hoider poreddv Gooal Reddy, S/o: Late Kanaka Reddy, Aged about 60 ye'ars, R/o 5-i60,'Fotjrth Lane, Srinagar Colony, Kothagudem, Khammam Disirict.

¶9

...PETITIONER

¶10

AND

¶11

1 No(hern Power Distribution Cornpany of A_P. Ltd., Represented by its Assistant Divisi_onal Engineer (Electrical) (Operation/Sirb-Division) j Kothagudem, Khammam District

¶12

2 The Divisional Engineer (Operation/Sub-Division): Northern power Distrabution Company of A.P. Ltd., Kothagudem, khammam District

¶13

3 Vandanapu Venkateswarlu, S/o: Narayana, Aged about 68 years, Medical Practitioner, Rr/o N.K. Nagar, Kothagudem town and mandai, Khammam District

¶14

...RESPONOENTS

¶15

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 appropraate writ, orders or directions and more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring that the acts, deeds and things of the respondent No.^'1 and 2 in not dismantling the service connection no. 13900-7407 and not releasing new service connection in the name of the writ petitioner for premises no. 5-14-2, to an extent of 2000 Sq. feet area in ground floor, south side portion, satuated at P. Gopala Reddy complex, Cooli line, Kothagudem town and mandal, Khammam District are illegal, arbitrary, mala fide and much against to the legal and fundamental rights guaranteed under the Constitution of lndia and

¶16

violation of principl() , of naturai justic:e and consequenlly dire r;t thr respondents l and 2 to dismantle ll-: r]yi511pg service connection nc. 139)(l-74C7 and release new service connec c,n in the name of the writ petitioner for prrem ses no. 5-14-2, to an extent of 200Cr S,l. feet area in (lround floor, soutl- side )crrtio.l, situated at p. Gopala Reddy con'rlr-.x, Cooli line, Kothagudem tow-r and nranCal, Khammam District.

¶17

l.A. NO: 1 OF 2013( ! f'MP. NO: 8442 OF 2013

¶18

Petition unde Iiection 151 CPC praying that in lhe cir,;u rstances stated in the affidavit filed in r-rpport of the petition. the High Col rt ma'r l,e pleased to direct the respondents 1 1rJ il to dismant e the existing service c:rner;tion No.13g007 407 and release I r>vr service connection in the narre of thr, writ petitioner for premises No.5-14-2 :o an extent of 1l000Sq feet area rn grour d f oor, south side portion, situat€|d at :'.(;opala Reddy Complex, Cooli lrne, Koth:gudem Town and Mandal, Khammam l)istrict, during tlre pendency of th ) abo'^_. wrrt petition in the interest of justice

¶19

Counsel for the Pe1 tir>ner: SRl. PALIVELA SATYARA..,A BABU

¶20

Counsel for the Rer oondent No.1 and 3: SRl. P. VINCTD KlJlVlr\R Counsel forthe Rer or>ndent No. 3: liRl. KOWTURU P,qVAhl KUMAR The Court made th,: following: ORDER

¶21

i a

¶22

¶23

HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE SUREPALLI NANDA

¶24

WRIT P ITION No.6735 of 2013

¶25

OR ER:

¶26

It is represented by Mr. P.Satyaraja Babu, the learned counsel for the petitioner that the cause of action in the present writ petition does not survive for adjudication.

¶27

Recording the above submission, the Writ^petition is dismissed as infructuous. However, there shall be no order as to costs.

¶28

Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand

closed.

i I

//TRUE COPY//

SD/- G. SIREESHA ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

¶33

sEc FICER

¶34

To,

¶35

1 One CC to Sri. Palivela Satyaraja Babu Advocate tOpUCl 2 One CC to Sri. P. Vinod Kumar, Advocate IOPUCI3 One CC to Sri. Kowturu Pavan Kumar, Advocate tOpUCl 4 Two CD Copies TJ GJP \ }-

HIGH COUR""

DATED:0810ti1,2023

ORDER

WP.No.6735 :rl'2013

,4 ,r:- ::': : -..
.r.?. c
,' !.<br>r'i,
ti Zli .{ -' \
l- , .,t l
lJi t.- i
-{,c ti' l:' tl ,i
t.i .q/
,l '.
,i ,
"/
"''ii-'.',.'"1x
-i--

DISMISSING tHE WP

AS INFRUCT .,OUS

WITHOUT C( fiiTs-

/':<br>b,t .\ u5
",L 5

Smt. Poreddy Satyavathi v. Northern Power Distribution Company of A.P. Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Poreddy Satyavathi v. Northern Power Distribution Company of A.P. Ltd.

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

Ms Himaja Guduru Vs The State of Telangana

Katta Vishwanatham, Vs Union of India

Mohd Majid Vs Union of India

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