Disposed

Siddamsetty Shoba Rani v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC23 Apr 2025WP/12241/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition seeking a mandamus directing authorities to accept the petitioner's application for electricity connection to her plot and release power supply, following an earlier similar order of this Court.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner permitted to make fresh application within two weeks; respondents to consider and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law within two weeks thereafter, subject to payment under the El

Siddamsetty Shoba Rani Vs The State of Telangana — Writ and Judicial Review | Telangana HC (2025)

¶1

[³³⁰¹ ]

¶2

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

¶3

WEDNESDAY, THE TWENW^{THIRDDAY OF APRIL} TWO THOUSAND AND^TWENWFIVE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE^{PULLA KARTHIK}

¶6

WRIT PETITIO N NO: 12241^{OF 2025}

¶7

Between:

¶8

Siddamsetty Shoba Rani, Wo^{S-. Ng1aya.1qaged} .^{about. 59 ye.ars,} OCC nous6wife.Rl/o.^{Plot No. 184, Flat No. 106, Mahalaxmi Homes,Moti} Nagar Hyderabad.

¶9

...PETITIONER

¶10

AND

¶11

The State of Telangana,^{rep. by its Principal Secretary, Power and Energy} Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad-500022.

¶12

Sotjthem Power Distribution^{Company Ltd', of Telangana,rep by its} Chairman and Managing^{Director, Mint Compound, Hyderabad.}

¶13

Southem Power Distribution^{Company Ltd', of Telangana, rep. by its} Superintending Engineer^{(operational) Cybercity, Hyderabad.}

¶14

Southem Power Distribution^{companyLtd of Telangana, rep by its Assistant} Divisional Engineer Operation,^{Chandanagar, Hyderabad}

¶15

Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation,^{Rep by its Commissioner,} Serilingampally Zone, HYderabad.

¶16

...RESPONDENTS

¶17

Petition under Article 226 of^{lhe constitution of lndia prayingthat in the} circumstances stated in the^{affidavitfiled therewith, the High court may be} pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order^{or direction moreparticularly one in the} nature of writ'of Mandamus^{by declaringthe actionof the Respondentsin not} accepting the application for^{electricity connectionto the petitioner premises} bearing Plot No. 94, admeasuring^{300 sq. Yds in sy. No.,80, Situated at Subhash} Chandra Bose Nagar Colony,^{New HafeezpetVillage, Serilingampally Mandal,} Rangareddy District as^{illegal, arbitrary,unjust and consequentlydirect the}

¶18

respondents to receive the application for the electricity conne,ctions and release the power supply without any further delay.

¶19

lA NO: 1 OF 2025

¶20

Petition under section 1 51 cPC praying that in the circu mstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High court may be pleased to direct the 3rd and 4th Respondents to receive the application for the electricity connection to the petitioner premises bearing plot No.94, aclrneasuring 300 Sq. Yds in Sy. No. 80, Situated at Subhash Chandra Bose Nagar Colony, New Hafeezpet Village, Serilingampally Mandal, Rangareddy district.

¶21

Counsel for the Petitioner: M/S NIKITA GOENKA

¶22

Counsel forthe Respondent No.1: GP FOR ENERGY

¶23

Counsel for the Respondent Nos.2 to 4: SRI N. SREEDHAR REEDy, SC FOR SOUTHERN POWER DISTRIBUTION COMPANY OF TELANGANA LIMITED

¶24

Counsel for the Respondent No.5: SRI G. MADHUSUDHAN REDDY, SC FOR GREATER HYDERABAD MUNICIPAL CORPORRATION

¶25

The Court made the following: ORDER

f-)

\ \

t ,

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE PULLA KARTHIK

¶31

WRIT PETITION No.12241 OF 202s

¶32

ORDER:

¶33

. With the consent of both the parties, this Writ Petition is taken up for disposal at the admission stage itself.

¶34

This Writ Petition is hled, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking the following relief:

¶35

"... to issue an appropiate Wit, order or direction more particularlg one in the nature of Wit of Mandamus bg declaring the action of the Respondents in not accepting the application for^{electncitA connection to the petitionerpremises beaing Plot} No-94 admeasuing 3OO Sq.Yds in Sy.No.8Q Situated i.dt Subhash Chandro Bose Nagar Colony, Neu Hafeezpet Villagie, Seilingampallg Mandal, Rangareddg Distict rrs illegal, arbitrary, unjust and consequently direct the respondents to receiue the application for the electricitg connections and- release the pou.ter supplg tuithout any further delag and to pass-.."

¶36

Heard Ms.Nikita Goenka, learned counsel for the petitioner; learned Government Pleader for Energr for respondent No. 1; Sri N.Sreedhar Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for Southern Power Distribr{tion Company of Telangana Limited, for respondent Nos.2 to 4; and Sri G.Madhusudhan Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, for respondent No.S.

¶37

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the subject matter of this Writ Petition is squarely covered by the order of this Court in W.P.No.1837 of 2023, dated 27.O1.2023, and requested

¶38

PK.J wp 12241 2025

¶39

¶40

this Court to pass similar order in the present Writ Petition also. The same is not seriously disputed by the learned Government Pleader as well as learned Standing Counsel for the respondents.

¶41

In vieu, of the above submissions and lor the r-easons alike in the order of this Court in W.P.No.1837 ol 2023, dated 27.O1.2023, this Writ Petition is disposed of permitting the petitioner to make a fresh application before respondent Nos.2 to 4 lbr release of electricity connection to the petitioner's propert5r bearing pb lot No.94 admeasuring 3OO Sq.Yds in Sy.No.8O, Situated at Subhash Chandra Bose Nagar Colony, New Hafeez;pet Village, Serilingampalll' Mandal, Rangareddy District, within a period of two (2) weeks from the daLe of receipt of a copy of this; order. Upon receipt of such an application, the respondents shall consider the same and pass appropriate orders, in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of two (21 weeks therefrom, subject to the petitioner mak.ir-rg necessary payment, as s.tipulated under the ElectricitSr Act, 2OCt3,.

¶42

)l^(l Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shal1 stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶43

SD/."]I.TIRUMALA DEVI //rRUE coPY// A1::-'I^REGISTBA&- \l^{" secnoruoFFtcER}

¶44

To, 1 . The State of Telangana, The Principal Secretary, power and Energy Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad-500022.

¶45

The Chairman and Manlging Directo.r, Southem power Distribution Company Ltd., of Telangana, Mint Compound, Hyderabad.

¶46

¶47

itmm,,,uff:lig-!:#:'#,Uffl,,tto'#:il::., i^y,lf B3J?" %."# tl "93^{;:n,;,tni,,:? t?I g gl" or re,a n ga na, a} t

¶48

One CC to Sri N.'sreedt

¶49

;Filr.i,,.{i$iEf#frTs,s,,'d-:P.3;::;:I":ffi ::JTln"p,

¶50

,o i;ffiB3ll?":,"I

HIGH COURT

CC TODAY

DATED:2310412025 \

ORDER

-r::-s\ r\E Si4 r.>^,
I
) 2 5 [Pn 2u5
:,: -
)
(-(,

¶59

WP.No.12241 of 2025

¶60

DISPOSIN OG THE WRIT PETITTON WITHOUT COSTS

Siddamsetty Shoba Rani v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Siddamsetty Shoba Rani 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

Vanaparthi Mani Vikash Vs The State of Telangana

S.Rajender Sagar Vs State of Telangana

Mr. Bolla Sreekanth Vs The State of Telangana

R. Narendar Vs The State of Telangana

T. Ratnamala Reddy Vs The State of Telangana

Sri. Byragoni Chaitanya Vs The State of Telangana