Disposed

Mandala Chandrakala, v. Telangana State Central Power Distribution Company Ltd.

Telangana HC21 Sept 2024WP/19602/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a writ petition filed by a tenant seeking a temporary power connection. The court found the petitioner failed to comply with a notice order requiring title deeds and security deposit, directing her to make a fresh compliant application.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to file fresh compliant application within a week; Respondent No.3 to decide similarly within a week thereafter; No costs to the petitioner.

Mandala Chandrakala, Vs Telangana State Central… — Service and Employment | Telangana HC (2024)

¶1

132521

¶2

HIGH COURT^{FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA} AT HYDERABAD (SPecial Original^{Jurisdiction)}

¶3

SATURDAY,^{THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF SEPTEMBER} TWO THOUSAND^{AND TWENTY FOUR}

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE^{MRS JUSTICE SUREPALLI NANDA}

¶6

WRIT PETITION^{NO:1960 20F 2016}

¶7

Between:

¶8

38^years, Mandala^{Chandrakala, W/o Late M'Balraj'. Agedabout} 6i","6,1i"J.]'nvb.ii]lo.^{t -srl,tu+,Ramnasa-r'Hvderabad}

¶9

...PETITIONER

¶10

AND

¶11

1 Telanoana State^{Central Power Distribution CompanyLtd''Vidyut Soudha'} Khairtebad,^HYderabad

¶12

The^{Divisional Engineer, TSSCPDCL AzamabadCircle' VST Road'} Hyderabad

¶13

3' The Assistant^{Engineer,TSSCPDCL, Circle CSE, Tilaknagar, Hyderabad}

¶14

4'K.Venkatesh,Sio.NotKnownto-theP-etitioner,Agedabout48years, - b":;'Ei;;i-"; Jt nv". il. r'16. i - s -zo t N +, Ram nasar' Hvd erabad

¶15

...RESPONDENTS

¶16

Petition under^{Article 226 of the Constitution of lndiapraying that in the} circumstancesstatedintheaffidavitfiledtherewith'theHighCourtmaybe pleased to issue an^{appropriate writ or direction more particularly one in the nature} ofWritofMandamus,declaringtheactionoftheofficialRespondentNo.3in refusingtoreceiveandprocesstheapplicationofthePetitionerforthesupplyof :temporary/service^{power connection to the Petitioner,stenantedMulgiforming part} of the House,^{premisesNo.1-9-20iAl4, situatedat Ramnagar' Hyderabad as being} illegal, arbitrary^{and violative of Article 14'19(1 )(g)' 21 and 300-4 of the} constitutionoflndiaandconsequentlydirecttheRespondentNo.3toreceiveand process the application of^{the Petitioner for the grant of power supply} temporary/servicepowerconnectiontothePetitionerstenantedMulgiformingpart

¶17

I l t ll

¶18

of the House premifies No.1-g-20tAr4, situated at Ramnagar, Hyderabad without insisting for NOC from Respondent No.4 or tiile deeds

¶19

I.A. No: 10F2016(WPMP. NO: 24041 oF 20 16)

¶20

petition under Section 151 cpc praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fired in support of the petition, the High court may be preased to direct the Respondent No.3 tc the apprication or the petitioner ror the srant ",lJ;:::J,;",ffi;;:, :.""... :onnection' pending disposal of the main writ petition

¶21

Counsel for the petitioner: SRI VIJAY B PAROPAKARI Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 to 3: SRI R VINOD REDDY

¶22

(sc FOR TSTRANSCO)

¶23

Counsel for the Respondent No.4: SRI CHANDRAIAH SUNKARA

¶24

The Court made the foltowing: ORDER

¶25

HON'BLE^{MRSJUSTICE SUREPALLI NANDA}

¶26

o 1 I N

¶27

o RD^ER:

¶28

Heard^{Sri Viiay B'Paropkari' learnedcounsel} appearing^{on behalf of the Petit'oner and Sri R'Vinod} Reddy,^{learned Standing Counsel forTSSPDCL'} appearing^{on behalf of respondentNos'1 to 3'}

¶29

The Petitioner^{approachedthe Courtseeking} prayer as^under:

¶30

" " to^{issue an appropriateyn:"9l d:'ution more} particularly^{on" in"'ii{-ni[u'e or} Y'ft ?f^Mandamus declaring^{the acuon'oiti"- ofri'iut'nes117'!ent No'i in} refusing^{to receive lna'' jor"ttthe ap,plicationof the} Petitioner^{for the t'ipt1 of temporary/'service power} connectiontotneeei{i\k'i^::',"2:Zo"l^J'f .'t";[::i1!":t {, #:, J:^{" ;7 o ![""#i' ],' L"e 1,} { ! fQlr' a rb^{i t r a} ry^{a n d} viotative^{or articte"iZ1%D(gi zL 2na"300-A of rhe} constitution^{tf ;';;-iii"Zit""q'enttv' direct} a^ppl ication^the Respond^{ent t'to's'ti'i"'Jiul'iap.:or,""} -t'h'e of the^{Petition"'""ro'""ii'"} 'ioi'-^{irant or power supply of} Emoorary/servi'" 'i'nection^{'to the Petitioners} No' Eninted^{nu4i roriini pior the Ho'us'e} 'premises 1^{- g - 2 0} /^{A/ 4 s i tu atei a"''a t " -au tiu g u'' !'v d y1n a a w i t h o u t} insistins^{ror Noc'iro"} ir:tili4"rrit"No'4or title deeds ')iii iiZiiir,n other order or orders"

¶31

3 Thecaseofthepetitionerinbriefisthatpetitioneristhe tenant^{of resPondent No'4and she is running businessin the} said^{mulgi under the name andstyle of M/s'SaiGaYathri} Embroidery^{Works' Later'respondentNo.4 harassed the} petitionerbyremovingthepowersupplytothesaidshop. Hence,^{the petitioner submitted an applicationto respondent}

¶32

¶33

No.3 to grant the temporary service power connectron to the petitioner,s tenanted Mulgi forming part of the House premises No.L_9_20/A/4 situated at Ramnagar, Hyderabad, however, respondent No.3 refused to receive and process the same. Aggrieved by the same, the present writ petition is filed.

¶34

4 Sri R.Vinod Reddy, learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents placing reliance on the averments made at paragraph Nos.2 to 4 of the counter aFfidavit fired on beharf of respondent No.3, submits that the petitioner hacl not filed proper application enclosing all the required documents and letter was addressed to the petitioner dated 16.08.:2016 by Registered post calling upon the petitioner to p,;66r." the tiUe deed/rental deecl and also to pay three timer; security deposit for processing the petitioner.s application for new service connection and the same was delivered on 19.08.2016. However, the petitioner had not approached the respondents and had not compried with the directions issued in the lefter dated 16.0g.2016 and hence, the respondents were not in a position to consider the request of the petitioner and grant the prayer as sought for in the present writ petition for supply of temporary service power

¶35

¶36

\ h

¶37

connection^{to the PetitionerstenantedMulgi forming part of} the^{House premisesNo'1-9-20iA/4'situatedat Ramnagar'} Hyderabad'

¶38

5 Learned^{Standing Counselfurthersubmits that upon the} ndent^{No.3 bY filing a fresh} petitioner^{aPProachingthe respo} ired^{documents as mandated} application^{enclosing all the requ} the^{letter dated 16'08'2016} under^{Rules as Pointed out in} to the Petitioner^herein'the addressed^{bY the resPondents} would^{beconsideredin} application^{ofthe Petitioner} accordance^{to law withina reasonable time'}

¶39

6.^{Taking into considerationthe submissions made} by the^{rearned standingcounserappearing on behalfof} respondent^{Nos'1 to 3' the writ Petitionis disposed of} directing^{the petitioner to make a fresh application} ,an,n^{a/periodof one(l) week from the date of receipt} of a^{copy of this order duly enclosing alt the required} documents^{as mandated under the Rules duly enclosing} a the^{documentsas pointed out in the letter dated} 16.08.2016^{forwardedto the petitioner by the office of} the^{respondent No'3 herein' which had been delivered} to the^{petitioneron 19'08'2016 and upon receiving all}

¶40

¶41

the required documents along with the said fresh application of the petitioner, the respondent No.3 shall consider the application of the petitioner in accordance to law and pass appropriate orders, within a period of one(l) week thereafter and duly communicate the decision to the petitioner. However, there shatt be no order as to costs.

¶42

As a sequel, the miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in the Writ^petition shall also stand closed.

¶43

SD/.P. PADMANABHA REDDY ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

//TRUE COPYII

SECTION OFFICER

To,

1 power Distribution company Ltd., Vidyut Soudha, If; 5[gB:A :i?ACentrat

¶48

1. The DivisionaiEnoineer TSSCPDCL AzamabadCircle, VST Road, Hyderabad

¶49

1. . . 9n" The 9nu Assistant 99 99 to Sri to Sri Enoineer Ch2rndraiah Viiay B paro_pakari, TSSCPDCL, dunG;; AOroirtu Adr,iili"'iopj.r'cfCircle CSE, i-o}filrTilaknagar, HyrJerabad 6 7. one cc to sri R. rtinoo Redoy(Subr'ib-r-nnltdbd) topucl . Two CD Copies

¶50

TJ BS

"^I l : i I i 1 i

HIGH COURT

DATE D:2 110912024

o 1r. lriE S14 )6
(
-) ('
:
o 2 6 Dll, uu
(
*
sp4

¶56

ORDER

¶57

WP.No.19602 of 2016

¶58

DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION

¶59

WITHOUT COSTS

¶60

q
h
h'I
L{ h /r+

Mandala Chandrakala, v. Telangana State Central Power Distribution Company Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mandala Chandrakala, v. Telangana State Central Power Distribution Company 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

M/s Sri Chimmanlal Paper Mills, Vs A.P. Central Power Distribution Company limited

P.L.V. Prasad, S/o. P. Rama Naidu Vs Andhra Pradesh Central Power Distribution Company Ltd.

M/s. Keerthi Industries Limited, Vs Central Power Distribution Company of Andhra Pradesh Ltd.

G. Ramprasad, Vs The Managing Director

M/s Hyderabad Supplying Co. Vs The State of Telangana

Quality Wire Products, Vs The State of Telangana