Dismissed

Smt. Bantu Lakshmi v. The A.P. Central Power Distribution Company Limited

Telangana HC18 Nov 2024WP/32225/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court addressed a Writ Petition seeking mandamus for electricity connections. Noting a petitioners' submission via the associated Miscellaneous Petition that the interim order dated 01.03.2011 disposed of the matter, the Court closed the writ petition without costs.

What did the court decide?

Writ Petition and pending miscellaneous applications closed without costs.

Smt. Bantu Lakshmi Vs The A.P. Central Power… — Service and Employment | Telangana HC (2024)

¶1

132s21

¶2

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶3

(Special Original J urisdiction)

¶4

MONDAY, THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HONOURABLE MRS JUSTICE SUREPALLI^NANDA

¶7

WRIT PETITIO N NO: 32225 OF 2010

¶8

Between:

¶9

Smt. Bantu Lakshmi, W/o. B. Rama Chandram,^{about40 years'Occ;} Housewife, R/o. H.No.2-48-2124, Sy,No.91, Telecom^Nagar, Gachibowli' Serilingampally, Ranga Reddy District.

¶10

Smt. Baojja Nirmalamma, W/o. Lalaiah Housewife^{Fl/o. H.No.2-48-216, Sy.} No. 91, T6lecom Nagar, Gachibowli, Serilingampally,^{Ranga Reddy District.}

¶11

Sri Kondapally Venkataiah, S/o. K.^{Rama Krishna Daily Wage} -Labour^R/o. H.No. 26lR-Cl1/2, Sy. No. 91, Telecom Nagar, Gachibowli,^{Serilingampally'} Ranga Reddy District.

¶12

Smt. Kapera Alivelamma, W/o K. Mahesh Housewife Rl/o. H.No.^2-4812129, Sy. No. 91, Telecom Nagar, Gachibowli, Serilingampally, Ranga^Reddy District.

¶13

Sri T. Krishnaiah, S/o. T. Shankaraiah^{Daily Wage Labour R/o. H No. 2-} 4812t29, Sy. No. 91, Telecom Nagar, Gachibowli,^{Serilingampally,Ranga} Reddy District.

¶14

.....PETITIONERS

¶15

AND

¶16

The A.P. Central Power Distribution Company^{Limited, (Operation) lntegrated} Customer Service Centre Kukatpally,^Hyderabad.

¶17

The A,P. Central Power Distribution Company Limited,^{(Operation West} Circle, Greater Hyderabad) Kukatpally, Hyderabad.

¶18

The Assistant Engineer, A.P. Central Power Distribution Company Limited Kukatpally, Hyderabad.

¶19

.....RESPONDENTS

¶20

Petition Under Article 226 of th'e Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in not giving electricity

¶21

supply connections and fixing meters to the^petitioners House^{bearingNos2-48-} 2124, 2-48-216, 26lR-Cl112, 2-4812129 and 2-4812129^{situatedin Sy, No.91,} Telecom Nagar, Gachibowli, Ranga Reddy District^{even after collecting} necessary fee from the^petitioners as^{illegal, arbitrary againstto the Principles of} Natural J ustice.

¶22

|.A.NO:1 OF 2010^{(WPMP.NO:4095 4 0F 2010)}

¶23

Petition Under Section 151 CPC^praying that^{in the circumstancesstated} in the affidavit filed in suppoft of the^{petition,the High Court maybe pleasedto} direct the respondents to take^{necessarysteps for allottingelectricitysupply} connections to the^petitioners House^{bearing Nos. 2-48-2124,2'48-216, 26lR-} Cl112, 2-4812129 & 2-4812129 situated^{in Sy. No. 91, Telecom Nagar, Gachibowli,} Ranga Reddy District.

¶24

Counsel for the Petitioners : SRI AVANCHA^{H.CHAKRAVARTHY} Counsel forthe Respondents^: SRI^{R.VINOD REDDY (SC FORTSSPDCL)} The Court made the following ORDER

¶25

HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE SUREPALLI NANDA

¶26

WRIT PETITION No.32225,OF 2010

¶27

ORDER:

¶28

Heard Sri A.H. Chakravarthy, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners, Sri R. Vinod Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for TSSPDCL, appearing on behalf of respondent Nos. 1 to 3.

¶29

The petitioners approached the Court seeking prayer as under:

¶30

' ...to issue a writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in not giving electricity supply connections and fixing meters to the petitioners' House bearing Nos.2-48-2/24, 2-482/6, 26/R-C/l/2, 2-48/2/29 and 2-48/2/29 situated in Sy. No. 91, Telecom Nagar, Gachibowli, Ranga Reddy District even after collecting necessary fee from the petitioners as illegal, arbitrary against the principles of natural justice and pass...".

¶31

This Court vide its order dated 01.03.2011 in W.p.M.p.

¶32

No, 40954 of 2010 passed interim order in favour of the petitioners, and the same is extracted hereunder:

___r-

\'1,.122t5 20 r0

"This is an apprication to direct the respondents to take necessary steps for release of electricity supply to the service connections of the petitioners, houses bearing Nos.2-48-2/24, 2_4g_2/6, 26/R_C/ I/2, 2_ 48/2/29 and 2-48/2/29 in survey No.91 of Telecomnagar, Gachibowli, Ranga Reddy District.

¶37

Having regard to the fact that this Court, by order dated 29.05.2009, in W.p.M.p.No.13657 of 2009 in W.P.No. 10667 of 2009 granted interim direction to the respondents therein not to dispossess the petitioners, the respondents hereln are directed to process the applications of the petitioners and extend electricity to their service connections, subject to the fcllowing terms:

¶38

(i) the petitioners shall comply with the terms and conditions of the respondents; and (ii) the release oF electricity shall be subject to the outcome of W.p.No. 10667 of 2009. Subject to the above direction, W.p.M.p. is disposed of ."

¶39

4, It is represented by the learned counsel appearing on beharf of the petitioners that by virtue of the interim order dated 01.03.2011 passed in W.p.M.p. No.4O954 of 2010, no further orders are necessary.

¶40

¶41

wP 12225 20 l0

¶42

5, Bringing the said submission on record, the

¶43

writ petition is closed. However, there shall be no order as to costs.

¶44

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

¶45

SD/. A,V.S. PRASAO ASSISTANT EGISTRAR

¶46

//TRUE COPY//

¶47

SE N OFFICER

¶48

To '1. One CC to SRI AVANCHA H CHAKRAVARTHY' Advocate TOPUC-]^-..^. i..tp;; cc 6^{sRi C.vrr.roo REDDY (sc FoRrssPDCL)AdvocateIoPUC]} 3. Two CD CoPies

SA BN

HIGH COURT

DATED:1811112024

ORDER

WP.No.32225 o12010

td EOF
sP
l{
GF t
\s \<br>o
c H,}

¶56

CLOSING THE W.P

¶57

WITHOUT COSTS.

¶58

,$
(.r?
o
n IvP,q

Smt. Bantu Lakshmi v. The A.P. Central Power Distribution Company Limited

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Bantu Lakshmi v. The A.P. Central Power Distribution Company 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 Suguna Metals Pvt. Ltd., Vs The Telangana State Electricity Regulatory Commission

Donda Bhasker Vs Southern Power Distribution Company of Telangana

M/s Sri Uma Maheshwara Paper Pvt. Ltd., Vs The Andhra Pradesh State Financial Corporation

K.Premalatha, W/O K.Venkateshwarlu, Vs The state of Telangana, Through its Principal Secretary

A. Srinivasa Rao Vs The Executive Engineer Civil (Oandm)

Venkateswarlu a Vs State of Telangana