Disposed

Mr.Chettukindi Shivraj alias Kammari Shivraj v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC19 Mar 2024WP/6378/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition seeking mandamus for an electricity connection, the High Court disposed of the matter at the admission stage, directing the respondent authorities to decide the pending representations within two weeks after giving a fair hearing.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondent authorities to dispose of pending representations within two weeks after affording a fair hearing.

Mr.Chettukindi Shivraj alias Kammari Shivraj Vs The State… — Land Acquisition | Telangana HC (2024)

¶1

[³³⁰⁰ ]

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶3

TUESDAY, THE NINETEENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NAGESH BHEEMAPAKA

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO: 6378 0F 2024

¶7

Between:

¶8

Mr.Chettukindi Shivraj alias Kammari Shivrai, S/o. Late Chettukindi Balrai alias Kammari Balraj, Aged 5'1 yrs, Occ: Service, R/o. H. No.4-.,|-gS, Neai Prabhu Mandir, Sadasivpet Town and Mandal, Sanga Reddy District.

¶9

2 Smt Kammari Nikitha, Wo N. Nagendra Babu, Aged 26 yrs, Occ: Advocate, R/o.H.no.'13-3, Plot No. 1'18, Falt no. F2 Thirumai-a Aparthents, Ivtothinagar, Hyderabad.

¶10

...PETITIONERS

¶11

AND

¶12

1 The State of.Telangana, Rep. by Principal Secretary, Energy Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad.

¶13

2 The Chairman and Managing Director, TSSPDCL, Corporate Office, Mint Compound, Hyderabad, Telangana State.

¶14

3 The Superintending Engineer, Operation/TSSPDCL, SangaReddy.

¶15

4 The Divisional Engineer Electrical, Operation/TSSPDCL, Sanga Reddy.

¶16

5 The Additional Divisional Engineer, OperationiTSSPDCL, Sadasivpet.

¶17

Smt Amaradi lvlalleshwari, Wo. Balaiah, Age.60 years, Occ. Housewife, R/o H.No. 5-4-38, Sri Krishna Nagar Colony, Sadasivai:et Town 8 Mandal, Sangareddy District.

¶18

7 Smt. Munipally Anjamma, Wo. Munipally Satynarayana, Age. 58 years, Occ. House Wife, R/o. H.No. 4-2-93, Near Prabhu Mandlr, Sadasivape[ Town 86 Mandal, Sangareddy District. (Respondents No. 6 and 7 are noi necessary parties to the writ petition)

¶19

...RESPONDENTS

¶20

Petition under Article 226 of lhe 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 a writ of Mandamus declaring the action of Respondent No.5 in rejecting application of the Petitioners for granting Electricity for agriculture supply vide Email date. 2610212024 as arbitrary, illegal, unjust, in violation of fundamental

¶21

rights^{guaranteedunder Arlicle 14,21 of the Constitution of lndia and may be} pleased to^{issue consequential direction to the RespondentsNo 2 to 5 to grant} the Electricity^{connection for agriculture supply to the Petitionersin the saidland} admeasuring^{Ac. 1.18 1/2 Gts in Sy.no. 7161213, Edulavaguin Sadasivpet,} Sanga^{ReddY District.}

¶22

IA NO^{:, 1 OF 2024}

¶23

Petition under Section 151 CPC^praying that in the circumstances stated in the^{affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Courtmay be pleasedto} direct^{the RespondentsNo.2 to 5 to forthwithgrant Electricity connectionfor} agriculture^{supply to the Petitionersin the said land admeasuringAc.1.'18'1/2 Gts} in Sy.no.^{7161213,Edulavaguin Sadasivpet, Sanga Reddy District}

¶24

Counsel^{for the Petitioner:SRI SARANGAFZULPURKAR}

¶25

Counsel^{for the Respondent No.1: GP FOR ENERGY}

¶26

Counsel^{for the Respondent No.2to 5: SRI R. VINOD REDDY, SC FOR TSSPDCL}

¶27

Counsel^{for the Respondent No.6 &7: - - - -}

¶28

The Court^{made the following:ORDER}

¶29

¶30

HON'BLT SRI JUSTICE NAGESH BHEEMAPAKA WRIT PETITION No. 6378 of 2o24

¶31

ORDER:

¶32

This writ petition is filed seeking^{the following}

¶33

relief:

¶34

"to issue a Writ,^{Orderor Direction,more} particularlg one in nature of Writ of Mandamus declaing the action of respondent^{No.S in rejecting} application of th-e petitioners for^{grontingElectricitA} for^{agriculture, illegal, unjust, inuiolation of} fundamental^{rights guaranteed under Article 14, 21} of the Constitution of India ond mag^{be pleasedto} issue consequentiol direction to the^respondent Nos.2 to 5 to grant the Electicitg^connection for agiculture supplg to tle^{petitioners in the said land} admeasuing Ac.1.18 '/2 Gts in^{Sg.No-716/ 2/ 3'} Edulauagu in Sadasiupe| Sanga^{ReddgDistrict and} pass such-."

¶35

Heard learned^{counsel forpetitionersand} learned counsel for respondents.^{With the consentof} all the parties, this writ^{petition is disposed of at the} stage of admission.

¶36

Learned counsel for^{petitionersreqlrestedthis} Court to direct the respondent^{authorities to dispose} the petitioner's representations,^{dated 08.O1.2024} and 1O.O1.2O24 in a time^{bound period.}

¶37

¶38

Learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf "'l:_:lrrnn^{t Nos.6 and, 7 submits that} if the said petitioner's representation is still pending for consideration, the respondent authorities may be directed to dispose of the petitioner,s representation dated o8.o7.2024 ir'd IO.O7.2024 and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law

¶39

In view of the submission rnade by learned counsel appearing qn either side and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Writ Petition is disposed of directing the respondent authorities to dispose the petitioner,s representations, dated O8.O1.2024 and IO.OI.2024, after giving a fair opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and thereafter pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible, preferably, within a period of two (O2) weeks from today and communicate the same to the petitioner.

¶40

6 Accordingly the Writ petition is disposecl of. No costs.

¶41

¶42

Pending miscellaneous applications,^{if any, shall}

stand closed.

SD/.T. JAYASREE

ASSISTANT^REGPTRAR

//rRUE coPY/,

,EcTloN &r,"=*

To, 1 The Principal^{Secretary,EnergyDepartment'The State of Telangana'} Secretariat, The Chairman^{HYderabad'and Managing Director' TSSPDCL' Corporate Office' Mint}

¶49

2 Secretariat, The Chairman^{HYderabad'and Managing Director' TSSPDCL' Corporate Office' Mint} ' il;il;il:lrvoeianao, felinsana state-- --^.

¶50

3 The^{Superintenorng tnginlJi,''dp*'lionhsslPg!SanoaReddv'}

¶51

iiii6oi,iJi""arrn{ineeirE--ir;5tfi:lf"rtSrt"*ttq;*f ;gy 5 The Additional^Divisiona

¶52

6 one cc to sRl^{snnnr.rc-ni?uLpuiiKAn,49yqtq1'IOPUCI} i SliE d6 i"^{s'C11vruo'ir?r-o"o"V si roh.itPt??,\J?lfe?ngana} rourl it i'ii" 6d.i"-cp^{ioR ruERcv'Highcourt for the t}

¶53

Two^{CD CoPies}

BN BS "V

HIGH COURT

DATED:1 910312024

ORDER

WP.No.6378 of 2024

H e TA 14:
(
e
'J o(
oo 02 APB 2024
a
.<br>t *
PATcHeg

¶60

DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS

¶61

Mr.Chettukindi Shivraj alias Kammari Shivraj v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mr.Chettukindi Shivraj alias Kammari Shivraj 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

Anumula Yadaiah Vs The Telangana State Road Transport Corporation (Tsrtc)

Padithala Rajeshwar Rao Vs Chief General Manager, ( Project and Rac )

M/s. Nchem Sciences Vs The State of Telangana

Veeramsetti Kaleswara Rao Vs The State of Telangana

V. Susheel Kumar Vs State of Telangana

Udugu Venkateswarlu. Vs The Registrar