Disposed

Sri Kandregula Naga Venkatesh v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC11 Sept 2024WP/25141/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a writ petition challenging non-processing of an electricity connection application. It directed the petitioners to submit a fresh application with mandatory documents within one week, after which the Respondent must consider it.

What did the court decide?

Directed petitioners to submit fresh application with mandatory documents within one week; Respondent to consider and pass orders within one week thereafter.

Sri Kandregula Naga Venkatesh Vs The State of… — Service and Employment | Telangana HC (2024)

¶1

l32s2l

¶2

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

¶3

WEDNESDAY,^{THE ELEVENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER} TWO THOUSAND^{AND TWENTYFOUR}

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE^{MRS JUSTICE SUREPALLI NANDA}

¶6

WRIT PETITIO N NO:25^{141 0F 2024}

¶7

Between:

¶8

1 Sri Kandregula^{Naga Venkatesh, S/o K.L Narsimha Rao Agedabout 52 years'} il,ilr;i;;".;^{Fy; Ftot .tlo.ezStiativhana Nagar , Srinasar colonv Hvderabad-} 500873.

¶9

Sri Kethineni^{Naresh,S/o K.Veera} Rama Rao^Aged about 37 Years Occ.Business, R/o^{H.No15-163,New} Miria!guda ,vijaya vinayaka temPle Malkajgiri, Secunderabad^500047'

¶10

...PETITIONERS

¶11

AND

¶12

The State of^{Telangana, Rep by its PrincipalSecretary Powerandenergy} deoartment Secretariat,^Hyderabad.

¶13

, $tihH"PJ*iiEil]iidriion^{cornpanv or r-elansanaLimited' rep bv -its} - Ci"iii"in anO N4anaging-birector, tiaving its Corpolate Office at 6-1-50, tvlint Compound,^HYderabad.

¶14

il;'"s;;;i"i6"iing-E"gineer,^{TSSPDCL' Vidvuth Soudha'somaiisuda'} Hyderabad.

¶15

+. ifre -oiriiionat Engineer, TSSpDCL, Vidyuth soudha.Kukatpally, Hyderabad 5. iii;^{-d;;i;;i oifiiio"a'r engineer,'TsSPDCL,Avvappasocietv'Madhapur'} Hyderabad.

¶16

...RESPONDENTS

¶17

Petition under Article^{226 ol lhe Constitutionof lndia prayingthat in the} circumstances stated^{in the affidavitfiled therewith'the High Court may be} pleased to issue an appropriate^{writ orders of direction more particularly onein} ihl-nature of writ^{of mindamus by declaring the actionthe respondentsin not} ,"""i"i"g ,"0^{processingthe applicationfor rele^aseof eleclricity connection} -to in. p"i,ti""",^{buildingpt-ots Oearingnumberno1328 and 1329admeasuring 550} rq V"iOs i"^{sy.no78- situatet at ti't""'petvillage Gokul plotsSeriiingampally} rr,rl,iJri. nrngrteOOy^{district,nowmedchel-lvlalkajgiri Disrtict3s} iir"g"Gioitt";,unjust^{and consequenttydirect the respondentsto processthe} ;#di;; ror'providing the^{electricity connections and to reteasethe power} supply without^{further delaY.}

¶18

lA NO: 1 OF 2024

¶19

Petition under sjection 15i cpc praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High court may be pleased to direct the respondent No.3 to process the application for providing the electricity connection to the petitioner premises bearing plot NO.132g and1329 admeasuring550 sy.yards in sy.No.78 situated at at hafeezpet village Gokul plots Serilingampally Mandat, Rangareddydistrict, now medchel-Malkajgi;i District.

¶20

Counsel for the Petitioners: SRt. PERLA NARESH BABU Counsel forthe Respondent No.1: GP FOR ENERGY Counsel for the Respondent No.2 to 5: SRI R.VINOD REDDY, sc FoR TSSPDCL

¶21

The court made the fotlowing: oRDER

¶22

i 1 t I

¶23

¶24

SUREPALLI^NANDA HON,BLE MRS 'USTICE

¶25

WRIT PETITION No.25141OF²⁰²⁴

¶26

ORDER:

¶27

Heard Sri Perla^{Naresh Babu, learnedcounsel} appearing on^{behalf of thepetitioners, learned} Assistant Government^{Pleader for Energy, appearingon} behalf of respondent^{No.1 and Sri R' VinodReddy'} tearned Standing^{Counsel for TSSPDCL,appearingon} behalf of resPondent^{Nos.2 to 5.} r

¶28

The^{petitionersapproachedthe Court seeking} prayer as under:

¶29

" ... to issue an appropriate^{writ orders of directionmore} particularly one in the^{natureof writ of MandamusbY} declaring the action^{the respondents in not receiving and} processing the application^{for release of electricity} connection to^{the petitioner buildingplots bearingNos'} 1328 and 1329^{admeasuring55O sq yards in Sy No'78} situated at Hafeezpet^{Village, Gokulplots,Serilinqampally} Mandal Rangareddy^{Districtnow MedchelMalkajgiri} District as^{itlegal, arbitrary,unjust and consequently} direct the^{respondents to processthe application for} providing the electricity^{connectionsand to release the} power supply without^{furtherdelay and to pass such} other order or^{orders as the Hon'bleCourt may deem fit} and proper in^{the circumstances of the case"'}

¶30

¶31

,n"_rara r_r3[4,

¶32

It is the specific case of the petitioners that the respondents are not receiving the application oF the petitioners for release of electricity connection to the petitioner building plots bearing Nos. 132g and L32g admeasuring 550 Sq. yards in Sy. No.7g situated at Hafeezpet Village, Gokul plots, Serilingampally Mandal Rangareddy District now Medchel Malkajgiri District.

¶33

Sri R. /inod Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for TSSPDCL. appearing on behalf of respondent Nos. 2 to 4 submits that u pon the petitioners making a fresh application enclosing the rslgy665 documents as mandatory under the rules, the respondent No.3 would receive the same and consider the same in accordance to law.

¶34

Taking into consideration the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, the writ petition is disposed of directing the petitioners to make a fresh application to the respondent No.3 seeking release of electrcitiy connection to the petitioners building ptots bearing Nos. 1328 and 1329 admeasuring S5O sq yards in Sy. No.78 situated at Hafeezpet Village, Gokul ptots,

¶35

¶36

w? zs t.l_20 G..lt

¶37

Serilingampally^{MandalRangareddyDistrict now} Medchal Matkajgiri^{Districtby duly enclosingall the} relevant documents^{as mandatedunderrules within} one (1) week^{from the date of receipt of a copy of the} order and upon^{thepetitionerssubmittingan} applicataon afresh^{to therespondent No'3 duly} enclosing all the^{required documents as mandated} under the rules, the^{respondentNor3 shall consider the} same and^{pass appropriate ordersin accordance to law} within one⁽¹⁾ week^{thereafter. However, there shall} be no order as to^costs.

¶38

Miscellaneous^{petitions, if any, pendingin this Writ}

¶39

Petition, shall^{stand closed.}

¶40

SDL P.CH.NAGABHUSHAMBA ASSISTANT E TRAR //TRUE COPY// SE ION OFFICER

¶41

To,

¶42

One CC to^{SRIPERLA NARESH BABU, Advocate'[OPUC]}

¶43

2 One CC^{to SRI R.VINOD REDDY, SC rcRTSSPDCL{OPUCI}

¶44

Two CCs^{to GP FOR ENERGY,High Court for the State of Telangana at} Hyderabad. [OUTI

¶45

Two CD^CoPies-

¶46

One^SPareCoPY.

¶47

¶48

cys

¶49

I I I I I I tI I Ii I I

HIGH COURT

DATED: 1110912024

ORDER

WP.No.25141 of 2024

i I

rH E STA )i
,s
(
v7
1 3 0ttl 2024
or))q
ItI ipar'.P s.O

¶56

CLOSING OF THE WRIT PETITTON WITHOUT COSTS

¶57

4 l2/ ul gCdf,s)

Sri Kandregula Naga Venkatesh v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri Kandregula Naga Venkatesh v. The State of Telangana

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

Manga Somaraju Vs The Special Deputy Collector (Tribal Welfare)

S.Tirupathaiah, Vs The Singareni Collieries Company Limited.

Jama Susheela Vs The State of Telangana

Oddepalli Babu Vs The State of Telangana

M/s Rtss Man Power Solutions, Vs Telangana State Tribal Welfare Residential Educational

Sherla Sharida, Vs The State of Telengana