Allowed

Gudise Neelamma, v. Southern Power Distribution Company of Telangana Limited

Telangana HC21 Sept 2024WP/20812/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Hon'ble High Court directed the Telangana Electricity Distribution Company to pay the balance ex-gratia sum of Rs.1,00,000 to the petitioner within four weeks, adhering to Upa-Lokayukta orders and Regulatory Commission guidelines following an electrical accident death.

What did the court decide?

Ordered the Respondent to pay the balance ex-gratia of Rs. 1,00,000 within four weeks.

Gudise Neelamma, Vs Southern Power Distribution… — Writ and Judicial Review | Telangana HC (2024)

¶1

[³²⁵² ]

¶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: 20812 OF 2016

¶7

Between:

¶8

Gudise Neelamma, W/o Late Adinarayana, Aged about 56 Years,^. Occ Agriculture, Kapugallu Village, Kodad [/andal, Nalgonda District, State of Telangana

¶9

...PETrroNER

¶10

AND

¶11

Southern Power Distribution Company of Telangana Limited, (TSSPDCL) represented by, The Superintending Engineer (Operation), TSSPDCL, Operation Circle Office, Near RTC Station, NALGONDA- 508001

¶12

...RESPONDENTS

¶13

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia^praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court^maybe pleased to issue a Writ in the nature of Writ of [/andamus or an appropriate Writ or order or direction to the Respondent herein holding that the action^{on the part} of the Respondent in not^paying balance exgratia^relief of^Rs.1 ,00,0001(One Lakh only), despite of the directions for^payment of exgratia relief^of Rs.2,0C,000r-( Two Lakh only) by the Honble Upa-Lokayukta, lnstitution^of Lokayukta, Hyderabad issued in^proceedings No.414112015i82,^Dated19-10- 2015 keeping in view of the Orders of the A.P.Eiectricity^{Regulatory Commission,} Hyderabad issued in^proceedings No. APERC/ Secy/^{EAS/S-1O1117712013,} Dated.13-08-2013 as illegal, arbitrary and violation of^{fundamental rights} guaranteed under the Constitution and direct the Respondent to^pay exgratia to the Petitioner herein as^per the orders of the Hon'ble Upa-Lokayukta,^lnslitution of Lokayukta, Hyderabad issued in^{proceedingsNo.414112015182'} Dated.19-'10- 2015, within a time bound^period

¶14

l.A. NO:1 oF^{2016(WPM P. NO: 25527OF 2016)}

¶15

Petition under^{section 151 cPC praying that in the circumstancesstated} in the affidavit^{filedin support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to} directtheRespondenttopaybalanceexgratiareliefofRs.l,00.000/-(oneLakh only)tothePetitioner.hereinaSperordersoftheHon.bleUpa-Lokayukta, lnstitution of^{Lokayukta, Hyderabadissued in proceedingsNo.4141120151132'} Dated. 19-10-20'l^{5 keeping in view of the ordersof the A.P.ElectricityRegulatory} Commission,^{Hyderabadissuedin proceedingsNo APERC/ Secy/ EAS/S-} 1O1t17712013, Dated.13-08-2013,^{as the directionsof the Electricily Regulatdry} commission^{are mandatory & bindingin nature on the ElectricityTransmission} and Distribution^{companies, within a time bound period pending disposal of the} Writ Petition

¶16

Counsel for the^{Petitioner: SRl. P. RAGHAVENDRARAO}

¶17

Counsel for the^{Respondent:SRI R. VINOD REDDY , SC FOR TSSPDCL} The Court made^{the following: ORDER}

¶18

HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE SUREPALLI NANDA

¶19

T PETI 812 ot 2

¶20

ORDER:

¶21

Heard Sri P.Raghavendra Rao, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Sri R.Vinod Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for TSSPDCL, appearing on behalf of respondents.

¶22

The petitioner approached the Court seeking prayer as under:

¶23

to issue a Writ in the nature of Writ of Mandamus or an appropriate Writ or order or direction to the Respondent herein holding that the action on the paft of the Respondent in not paying balance exgratia relief of Rs.1,00,000/-(One Lakh only), despite of the directions for payment of exgratia relief of Rs.2,00,000/(Two Lakh only) by the Hon'ble Upa Lokayukta Institution of Lokayukta, Hyderabad issued in proceedings No.4141/2015/82, dated 19.10.2015 keeping in view of the Orders of the A.P. Electricity Regulatory Commission, Hyderabad issued in proceedings N1.APERC/Se)y/EAS/S- 101/i77/2013, dated 13.08.2013 as illegal, arbitrary and violation of fundamental rights guaranteed under the Constitution and direct the Respondent to pay exgratia to the Petitioner herein as per the orders of the Hon'ble Upa Lokayukta Institution of Lokayukta, Hyderabad issued in proceedings No.4141/2015/82, dated 19. 10.2O15 within a time bound period and pass such other order or orders"

¶24

It is the specific case of the petitioner that the petitioner's husband late Gudise Adi Narayana, S/o.Veeraiah, an agriculturist by occupation, met with fatal electrical accident and died on the spot due to Electrocution on 16.09.20L4 as a result of electrical short-circuit due to high

¶25

¶26

voltage and erratic power supply at the agricultural^pump-set at Kapugallu Village of Kodad Mandal of l.,ialgonda District, and the petitioner is entitled for an amount of Rs.2,00,000/towards enhanced exgratia as^per the circular^guidelines dated 13.08,2013 vide^proceedings No.APERC/Secy/EAS/Sl0L/L77/2013, however, in spite of repeated requests of^the petitioner, only an amount of Rs.1,00,000/- had been released to the petitioner and the balance amount of Rs.1,00,000/- had been withheld. Aggrieved br7 the same,^the present writ petition is filed.

¶27

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the^petitioner placing reliance on the circular guidelines dated 20.09.2013 pertaining to enhanced exgratia amount in case of fatal accidents to non departmental^person and^animals due^to electrocution contends that the^petitioner is entitled for the relief as prayed for in the^present Writ Petition. The relevant poftion is extracted hereinunder:

¶28

"'fhe above payment of ex-gratia shall be made subject to the conditions laid down in B.P.Ms.No.491, dated 10.08.1973 which are reiterated below:

¶29

1 The payme;rt should be made without admitting any legal liability.

¶30

2 Departmental officers should make the acutal payments directly to teh legal heirs. Utmost care must be taken to ascertain teh legal heirs. Proper receipts should be taken expresslyl reciting that

¶31

¶32

\ t

¶33

the amount^{is received in fult and final settlement} of claims^{against the APNPDCL'} 3. ini^{reviselAex-gratia amountorle^redshallcome} into force^{with iffect from 13'08'2013'}

¶34

The Chief^{Engineer/Eletcy'in charge of Zones are} hereby authirized^{Lo sanctionto ex-gratia"'}

¶35

A bare^{perusalof the relevant guidelines referredto and} extracted^{above, clearlyindicatesthat the petitioner is} entitled for^{revised exgratia with effect from 13'08'2013'} however,^{the same had been deniedby the respondents} arbitrarilY.

¶36

6 The Hon'ble^{Upa-Lokayukta has passed the order dated} 19.10.2015^{and the relevant portion of the said order} IS extracted^hereinunder:

¶37

"In the circumstances'^{the public servantis} directed^{to pay ex-gratia amountof Rs'2'00'000/-} to the complainant^{and submit compliance report to} this Institution,^{within two(2) months from the date} of receiPt^{of coPY of this order"'}

¶38

Sri R.Vinod^{Reddy, learned StandingCounsel appearing} on behalf^{of the respondentssubmitsthat the respondents} may be directed^{to consider the case of the petitionerfor} release^{of balance amountof Rs'1'OO'000/- as per the circular} dated^{13.08.2013 and the guidelinesdated20'09'2013as per} thedirectionsofHon,bleUpa-Lokayukta,dated19.10.2015

¶39

¶40

within a period of four(4) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶41

Taking into consideration the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions made by the learned Standing Counse! appearing on behalf of the respondents, the writ petition is disposed of directing the respondents to release the balance amount of Rs.1,OO,OOO/- (Rupees one lakh) due to the petitioner as directed by the Hon,ble Upa_Lokayukta vide its order, dated 19.1O.2O15 within a period of four(4) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order as per the circular dated 13.Og.2O13 and the guidelines dated 2O.O9.2013. However, there shall be no order as to costs.

¶42

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

¶43

//TRUE COPYII

¶44

SD/- N. RAJ GOPAL ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

¶45

To,

¶46

SECTION OFFICER

¶47

The Superintending Engineer ,southern power Distribution Comoanv of l9j9^{ns?laLim ited, (TSSPDCL)(Opreration),TSS pDCL, OperaribniirCte} uiTrce, Near R I⁽ⁱ station, NALGoNDA- 508001 2. One CC to SRl. P. RAG+lRygllpRA-BAO,Advocate tOpUCl 3. one CC to SRt. R. VINoD REDDY, sc roa rsSF-oit toFUcf 4. Two CD Copies

BM KKS

HIGH COURT

DATED:21 10912024

s 1HE s -4 iqr
d<br>-i
ou 260E[ o
I
.,

¶52

ORDER

¶53

WP.No.20812 o12016

¶54

DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS

Gudise Neelamma, v. Southern Power Distribution Company of Telangana Limited

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gudise Neelamma, v. Southern Power Distribution Company of Telangana Limited

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

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.

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

G. Ramprasad, Vs The Managing Director

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