Allowed

Ramulu Jarupula v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC4 Nov 2024WP/3541/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a writ petition wherein the petitioner sought mandamus for mandatory action on power connection complaints. The Court ordered respondents to receive the specific complaint and initiate appropriate action within one week.

What did the court decide?

Directed respondent Nos. 4 to 6 to receive the complaint dated 10.12.2022 and initiate appropriate action within one week.

Ramulu Jarupula Vs The State of Telangana — Service and Employment | Telangana HC (2024)

¶1

132521

¶2

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

¶3

MONDAY, THE FOURTH^{DAY OF NOVET/BER} TWO THOUSAND^{ANDTWENTY FOUR}

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE^{MRS JUSTICE SUREPALLINANDA}

¶6

WRIT PETITION^{NO:3541 OF2023}

¶7

Between:

¶8

Ramulu Jarupula, S/o^{Seetharam,ASe!. rQqV1} 91^{years, Occ Retired} erorove" of'APbvB^{eank Mina'geri Fyo H.No.t2-ig1lN1,vidya.Nagar} d',ii5i.,ii r.l1vl[aJ^{eicettent schooliKalwakurthv,Nasarkur"il'r?il'i?|}=*

¶9

AND

¶10

1 The State of Telangana,^{Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Energy Department'} Secretariat Building,^{Secretariat,Hyderabad.}

¶11

2 ii" Cnrir**^-antManaging ' Diiector, Telangana State Southern Power Distribution Company^{Ltd. (TSSPDCL), Hyd-erabad} .

¶12

J ind Sui6tiniendent'Enqinbei,^{Telan(aniStateSouthern Power Distribution} Company Ltd.^{(TSSPDCL) Ranga Reddy District'}

¶13

4 in"^{"Oirl.ionri EngineeiielEngana'S_tateSouthern Power Distribution} cdi'pr'riv LtJlirSS"FoCLi,^{Cham*papet, Sri Ram Nagar Colonv, Saroornagar} Ivlandal, Ranga ReddY^District.

¶14

5 tn"'-ftr"ir"ni ijividionat^{Engineer, TelanganaS-tate Southem Power} oil"tri6rii6n'e,jmprnv^{Lto. (TaSPDc[),chamipapet, Sri RamNagarcolonv'} Saroornagar Mandal,^{Ranga Reddy District.}

¶15

t) i6u Arii.trni- Engineer,"^{telan€ianaS_tateSouthern Power Distribution} d;o;;ftd.-frsstsodl1,^{cham"papet, sri Ram Nagarcolony'Saroornagar} Ivlandal, ilanga ReddY^District.

¶16

7 N;;;;;ih iff rivi,-'slo^{lr/unvaNaik, aged-about52.vears' oc! Head} C;;;bdi; An- r'ode, o/o^{SiperintendeitEnsineer, suryapet,suryapet} District.

¶17

I il"-nrritn Radha,^{D/o Thouriya, aged about} 31^{years, Occ'Software} E;;i;;;;.^prot Nb.5z in svno'.ibr^{5na 232 at Kta;thinagarKharmanshat} Viltige, Saroomagar^{Mandai, Ranga Reddy District} ...RES'ONDENTS

¶18

...RES'ONDENTS

¶19

Petition under Article^{226 of the constitutionof lndia prayingthat in the} circumstancesstatedintheaffidavitfiledtherewith,theHighCourtmaybe pleasedtoissueanorderordirectionmoreparticularlyoneinthenatureofWritof MandamusdeclaringtheactionoftherespondentNos.4to6innon-receivingthe complaintdatedl0.l2'2022ofthepetitionerandnon-initiatingtodisconnectthe4 power connections of the^{petitionervide USC No'102490141} '^102490459' 102490460andl0g445340respectivelypertainingthehouseofthepetitioner

¶20

bearing No.B-'l -17137, Plot No.37, Survey No.231 , 232 admeasuring 200 Sq. yards situated at Kranthi Nagar, Karmanghat, Saroornagar tvlandal, Ranga Reddy District, is highly llegal, arbitrary, u ncon stitutional, violation of principles of Natural Justice and also in violation of Articles 14 and 300-4 of the constitution of lndia, apart from violation of Provisions of Electr:icity Act, 2003 and consequenfly direct the respondent Nos.4 to 6 to receive the complaint daled 10.12.2022 of the petitioner, and to disconnect the 4 power connections of the petitioner vide USC No.102490141 , 102490459, 102490460 and 10944s340 respectively pertaining the house of the pelitioner bearing No.8-1-1 7/37, plot No.37, Survey No.231 ,232 admeasuring 200 s,q. yards situated at Kranthi Nagar, Karmanghat, Saroornagar Mandal, Ranga RedCy District.

¶21

lA NO: 1 OF 2023

¶22

Petition under section 151 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 respondert Nos.4 to 6 to receive the complaint dated 10.12.2022 of rhe petitioner, and to dis;connect the 4 power connections of the petitioner vide USC No.102490141 , 102,+9o4s9, 102490460 and 1o944s340 respectivety pertaining the house of the petitioner bearing No.8-1- 17t37,plot No.37, Survey No.231 ,232 admeasuring 200 Sc1. yards situated at Kranthi Nagar, Karmanghat, saroornagar I/andal, Ranga Redcly District pending disposat of the writ petition

¶23

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRl. RAPOLU BHASKAR

¶24

Counsel for the Respondent No.1: Gp FOR ENERGY

¶25

Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 2to6: SRI R. VINOD REDDy, SC FOR TSSPDCL

¶26

counsel for the Respondent Nos.7&8: sRr KOTHACHERUVU RAMEsH BABU The Court made the following: ORDER

¶27

HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE^{SUREPALLI NANDA}

¶28

WRIT PETITIO N No.35 4t^{ot 20 23}

¶29

ORDER

¶30

Heard Sri Rapolu Bhaskar,^{learned counsel} appearing on behalf of the^{petitioner, learned Assistant} Government Pleader for^{Energy,appearing on behalf of} the respondent No.1, Sri.^{R.Vinod Reddy, learned} Standing Counsel for^{TGSPDCL appearingon behalf of} the respondent Nos.2 to^{6and Sri Kothacheruvu} Ramesh Babu, learned counsel^{appearingon behalf of} the respondent Nos.7^{and 8.}

¶31

2 The Detitioner a ooroached the^{Courtseeki no} D raver as un der:

¶32

"...to issue an order or^{direction more particularly} one in the nature of Writ^{of Mandamusdeclaring the} action of the respondent^{Nos.4 to 6 in non receivingthe} comptaint dated 10.12.2022^{of the petitioner and non} initiating to disconnect the^{4 powerconnectionsof the} petitioner vide USC No.102490141 , 102490459, tO24gO46O and 1O9445340^{respectively pertainingthe} house of the^{petitioner bearingNo.B-1-17137,PlotNo} 37, Survey No.231,^{232, admeasuring200 Sq. yards} situated at Kranthi^{Nagar, Karmanghat, Saroornagar} Mandal, Ranga Reddy^{District is highly illegal, arbitrary,}

¶33

SN, .I \iP 35.11 2021

¶34

unconstitutional, violation of principles of Natural lustice and also in violation of Articles 14 and 300-4 of the Constilution ol India apart from violation of provisions o1' Elr:ctricity Act, 2003 and consequently, direct the responrlent Nos.4 to 6 to receive the complaint dated 1.O.7? .?_O22 of the petitioner and to disconnect the 4 power connections of the petitioner vide USC No. 10215tO741, 702490459, |02490460 and 109445340 resper:tively pertaining the house of the petitioner bearir-g No.B-1-17l37, plot No.37, Survey No.231,232 aclrneasuTing 200 Sq. yards situated at Kranthi Nagar, l(arnranghat, Saroornagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District and pass such other order or orders...,,

¶35

Sri. R.Vinod Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for TGSPDCL ;ippearing on behalf of the respondent Nos.2 to 6 submits thr:t the respondent Nos.4 to 6 may be directed to reccive fhe complaint of the petitioner dated 1O.72.2_022 and initiate app-opriate action in accordance with Iaw.

¶36

4, Taking into consideration the submission made by Sri R.Vinod Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for TGSPDCL appearing on behalf of the respondent Nos.2 to 6 on record, the writ petition is disposed of directing the respondent Nos.4 to 6 to receive the complaint of the petitioner dated LO.L2.2O22 pertaining to

¶37

¶38

\N, J wr, .ti1r 2021

¶39

petitioner's request for initiating action to disconnect the four power connections of the^{petitionervide USC} No. 1O249OL4L, LO249O459, LO249O46O^and LO944534O pertaining to the house of the^petitioner bearing No.8-1-17l37. Plot No.37, Survey No.23L, 232 admeasuring 2OO Sq.^yards situated at Kranthi^Nagar, Karmanghat, Saroornagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District and initiate appropriate action in accordance to law within a period of one(l) week from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. It is made clear that the objections of all concerned i.e., respondent^{Nos.7 and 8} also are to be received and considered by the respondent Nos.4 to 6, However, there shall be^no order as to costs.

¶40

The miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed. sD/- V.

¶41

sD/- V.^KAVITHA ASslsTAllT^REGISTRAR \ //rRuE^coPY// sect6*^oFFlcER

¶42

To,

¶43

lmtrryE#gfl,,''H$:;M :ffipffifgffiH':ffi;;;:;jffi

¶44

The Assrstan t^{Engiireer,Telangana S_tateSouthernPower Distribution} ' corpanv Lio trss"poct-), Cham[apet, Sri Ram Nagar Colony, Saroornagar Mandal, Rang;r^{ReddY District.}

¶45

. ^-

¶46

B. o;e Ci to sRl^{RAPCILU BHASKAR, Advogqt-e-[pfpql} -

¶47

O;; CC to Snl^{R. VINOD REDDY, SC foTTSSPDCL IOPUCI} iO One CC to SRI KOTHACHERUVU^{RAIUESHBABU,AdVOCAIC [O-PUU,I} ii.ifi -cbJto Gp for ENERGy, High court for the state of Telangana at Hyderabad [CIUT]

¶48

12.Two CD CoPiets

¶49

BIVy-

¶50

HIGH COURT

¶51

DATED:0411112024

¶52

1H E :;TArS
t
'J
P
o,J 2 6 [!:[ ?i?t c ,l
,t i5,i
.-- ,,/
-'/'
::

¶53

ORDER

¶54

WP.No.3541 of 2023

¶55

DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS

¶56

6 qi6
,,1'A

Ramulu Jarupula v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ramulu Jarupula 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/s. Surya Jyorthi Spinning Mills Ltd., Vs The Southern Power Distribution Company of

Gandala Parushuram Vs Sri Narsaiya

M/s. Surya Jyothi Spinning Mills Ltd., Vs The Southern Power Distribution Company of

Bhattu Venkanna Vs The State of Telangana

Mohammed Gouse Vs The State represented by Central Power

Yachamaneni Chandra Mohan Rao Vs The State of Telangana