Dismissed

A M K Constructions Pvt. Ltd. v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC2 Jul 2025WP/18681/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court disposed of a writ petition seeking a mandamus directing power distribution authorities to provide an electricity connection to the petitioner. The court observed that the petition was covered by a previous order and directed the release of power supply.

What did the court decide?

Petition disposed of directing respondents to release power supply subject to undertaking to produce occupancy certificate within prescribed period. No order as to costs.

A M K Constructions Pvt. Ltd. Vs The State of… — Service and Employment | Telangana HC (2025)

¶1

[³³⁰¹ ]

¶2

HIGH COURT^{FOR THE STATEOF TELANGANA} AT HYDERABAD

¶3

(SPecial Original^{Jurisdiction)}

¶4

WEDNESDAY,^{THE SECOND DAY OF JULY} TWO THOUSAND^{ANDTWENTY FIVE}

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HONOURABLE^{SRI JUSTICE PULLA KARTHIK}

¶7

WRIT PETITI^{ONNO: 186810F 2025}

¶8

Between:

¶9

A. M. K. Constructions Pvt.^{LT6,Syed Ali AshrafS/o' L4e-'Sy-ed Ali Dawood} Age. 68 ;;;: b;;;."BJsin"I',^{nvol ri r'ro i 7-z-jovt ,} .17-2465t2^and17-o2- 305l2lA di"*^i-Ga" nii eiis,'xrr."g'da,^{Hvderabad' T S'}

¶10

...PETITIONER

¶11

AND

¶12

1 The State of Telanqana,^{REp by its pfl-"iqqtSecretary Powerand Energy} Department^{Secretariat, Hyderabad-5uuuzz'}

¶13

2 Telanoana^{StateLtd, Rep. by its Chairmanand ManagingDirector having its} $ft%i;""ri;; ;6:^{i -56'rvii nt com pound, Hvd erabad500063'}

¶14

., The Chief^{General ManagerCommercial Mint CompoundT G S P D C L'} Hyderabad

¶15

4 The Superintending^{Engineer/Operation/ GHYD South Circle TGSPDC L'} Hyderabad

¶16

5 The Divisional^{Engineer/Operation/Asmangadh DivisionTGSPDCL'} Hyderabad

¶17

6 The Assistant^{Divisional Engineer/ Operation/Santosh Nagar Sub - Division} TGSP DC^{L, HYderabad}

¶18

7 The Assistant^{Engineer/ SE/OP /HYD South/ AE Madanapet98' IGSPDC L'} Hyderabad

¶19

8 TheGreaterHyderabadMunicipalCorporation,Rep.bytheCommissioner, Near Tank Butid,^HYderabad.

¶20

...RESPONDENTS

¶21

Petition under^{Article 226 of the Constitutionof lndiaprayingthat in the} circumstances^{stated in the affidavitfiled therewith'the High Court may be} pleased to issue^{writ order or directionmore particularly one in the nature of WRIT} OF MANDAMUS^{directingthe respondents2loTto provideelectricity connection} LT Supply^{for 26Nos. 1-Ph D/S each 2KW along with existing4Nos' SCs'}

¶22

¶23

R2009969 ('t-:)tr 1KW, Cat-1), R2006020 (1-ph, 1KW Cal_8), 12027545 (3_ph, SKW, Cat-8r, l.'.,022741 (1-ph, 1KW, Cat_1) thus making a :otat toad of 60KW by providing rre"w 53KVA DTR Connection to the Residenf ,al Euildi tg in Category_|, H.No.17-2- 3Ol ' 17_2-3OSt2 and 1t O2_305/2/A, adme;asu riog 4)2.22Sq. yards, situated at :hrrni Nade Ali Baig, Kurmaguda, Hyde.abaC, TS., bounded by North. Nei,r-lrbr..rs H.No.17_2_ 3OSlltNB and 20,Widr: Road. South. 30, wide Road, East. l]0',vide Road., West. Neighbour,s H.No.17-2_305/t/\ and portion of the H No 1 7 -:'-:*i/2rA Without insisting upon occupancy certif c lte from the gth respondent try r:iding that the refusar to provide ere.tricily r;cnnection to the above refer-ed : r:mises is illegal and arbitrary.

¶24

lA NO: I ol: t202a

¶25

Petiti :n urr i--r section 151 cpc praying that in the crrcums ances stated in the affidavit fii,lc i I support of the petition, the High Court nray be p lg2596 to direct the respondr:nts 2 o 7 lo providB electricity connection L.T Supply I or 26Nos. 1_ph D/S each 2l<\A/ a ()ng wilh existing 4Nos. SCs: R2009969 (l-ph iKW, Call), R2006020 (1-ph^.KW, R2OttS45 (3_ph, sKW, Cat_B), ?20.2274 1 (i_ph, 1KW, Cat-1) thus rrerk jrr(r a total load of 60KW by providing new 63K/A D IR Connection to the Resjderrtii, r l]uilding in Category-|, H.No..1Z_2_305/ 1, 1t_2_iOSl2 & 1l_02_ 305/21A, adrnt:as. r ng 432.22 Sq. yards, situated at (.;haw.ni lr ade Ali Baig, Kurmaguda, Flyr e ,rabad, T.S., bounded by North: Neighbour s H.No..l7_2_ 305/1lNB & 2rC' rvirje Road; South: 30, wide Road; East: 30, wicre Road.; west: Neighbour's , Nr 17-2-30511/A & portion of the H.No 17 -2,.-3ot 12/A. without insisting uporr rc'|: I r'|ancy certificate from the gth respondont pendi rg disposar of main wrrt petii ic, n.

¶26

Counsel for the pet;tioner: SMT. THAKUR ROOPA SINGH Counsel for the Respondent No.1: Gp FOR ENERGY

¶27

Counsel for^{the RespondentNos'2to 7: SRI N' SR-EEDHARREDDY' SC FOR} SOUTHERN^{POWERDISTRIdifi6ii CdT.APAT.TVOF TELANGANA LIMITEO} Counsel for^{the Respondent No'8:SRI M' ARUN KUMAR' SC FORGREATER} iioiCaeao^{MUNIcIPAL coRPoRArloN}

¶28

The Court^{made the following:ORDER}

TITE ,SON'BLE SRI JUSTICE PULLA KARTH}K I,!'RIT PETITION No.18 681 0F 2025

¶33

ORDER:

¶34

Wrtlr r.h consent of both the parties, thir, W:-it t etrtion is taken up f :,r- cli:rtosal at the admission stage itself

¶35

This \tu'r I petition is filed, under Arti::le 22,( of the

¶36

Constitutro rr c t rdia, seeking the following relief:

¶37

!..fo ls.ilt! ,,trit order or direction more particularly on(7 tL tt, ntlt ,re alV/RIT at^,,I.\ t AML)S U,:*"S.lh! responients 2 to'7 to ]),()1,(1t, cte( n(:itA ct).n.ecr1.t r.r ;tlppru for 26Nos. r-prl D/seach 2KW aLong rit rL exr;Ltn1 rN.i Sat-s. Ria)t)9!) , ) (1 ph, lKW, Cat_l), R2OO6O2O p Cn, triV, C.tt B), R)t).,7:;4; (3 PtL, t1tl , : L r B). R2O22741 (1 ph, lKW, CaL:t ) Lhu; ;Lakuttl o t<,tai t( %t ()f 6OKV| bt tr,. i 1;rq new 63KVA DTR Connect@ ro the Resule,attctl Btuttl ,g L Cetegor)t ).^j i ).17-2 3OS/1, ^17^{2-3OS/2AtZ_OZSOi)2t,.(ntjLe(1..1ntrcj} 1.)2.22 t),1 't' , 1;, sttuated at.Chautni Nade Ati Boig, ii;;or1.,,,1o. I ,ttd(.rt.be.t. ?S., lror r terr tty horltl: Neigttbou.r,s H.No.17 2-3Oi;1iA)'i a:t,, ltLtlt, ,)oad, Si)uth.. :() tr.,;. Road. Uest: 30, u,ide Ro/j!d.; W."t, i"irint,,,,, Lt l) t7 2 -]05/^1/1, :I I c.rtitn of the H.No.17.2 3OS/2/A. Wrtiout utsrrn,rr; tpon occupotl:.l ,:(IIcate Jionl. thp Eh:esponclent bA hotdtq tt,o ttrr, ,..j,,r ri-to prourde ?l'')r" rtr connechon ro the oboue ,.f""o"a pr-J^r"r,,. ts trre(r tl ( 1.) erbitra.lj^-0 r.l r r ;s... "

¶38

Ilearrl Sr r.Thakur Roopa Singh, learned ::ounsc I lor the petitioner: t::trr. : I Government pleader for Energy for res:ondent No. 1, Sri^\J Sl:-:edhar Reddy, learned Standinr: CorLr sel for Southern P:,'r.e )istribution Company of Telanga na Lir:r ted, for respondent l\ o:; I to 7; and Sri M.Arun Kumar, lertrnt,d S Lar]ding Counsel for^(.:-:ater Hyderabad Municipal Cr)rporaii, )n, for respondent \l ).8.

¶39

Learnr:: c r: nsel lor the petitioner submits that th.. sLlbjcct matter of th. s !,- I petition is squarely covered by tlre orck.r o[ this

wp la6al 2025

..]

Court in W.P.No.603O of 2O2O, dated 20.04.2020, and requested 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.

¶44

-I

¶45

In view of the above submissions and for the reasons alike in the order of this Court in W.P.No.603O of 2O2O, d.ated 2O.O4.2O2O, this Writ Petition is disposed oI directing the respondents to release the power supply to the premises of the petitioner subject to the compliance of the terms and conditions and on furnishing an undertaking to produce the occupancy certilicate from the concerned Municipal Corporation within a prescribed period, and if no such occupancy certilicate is produced u'ithin such period, it is open to the respondents to take appropriate action in accordance with law.

¶46

Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶47

SD/. B. REKHA RANI SISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER

¶48

To, 1. The Principal Secretary Power and Energy D a ment Secretariat, The State of Telangana, Hyderabad-500022.

¶49

2 The Chairman and Managing Director having i orporate office at 6-1-50, Mint Compound, Telangana State Ltd, Hyderabad 500063.

¶50

The Chief General Manager Commercial Mint Compound T G S P D C L, Hyderabad

¶51

The S0perintending Engineeri Operation/ GHYD South Circle TGSP DC L, Hyderabad

¶52

The Divisional Engineer/ Operation/Asmangadh Division IGS PDC L, Hyderabad

¶53

The Assistant Divisional Engineer/ Operation/ Santosh Nagar Sub - Division TGSP DC L, Hyderabad

¶54

The Assistant Engineer/ SE/OP /HYD South / AE Madanapet 98, IGSPDC^L, Hyderabad

¶55

¶56

)

¶57

The Cornn-^,r;r;ioner,, The Greater Hyderabad Municiprl Cc,rpor rtion, Near Tank []Lrncl -,yderabad.

¶58

9 One C^(l rc lrir Thakur Roopa Singh, Advocate [OF UC]

¶59

10 Two CCs k) ,f p for Energy, High C6rk f;r. th; StdG ,,,r iltrng,,na, at Hyder,rt,ad [:)UTl

¶60

1'l . One CO^'o S r' N.'sreedhgr Reddy, SC for Southern prtwer Disi .jbution Como;t' 7 r:'^-'e,angana fimiteOfdi.Ct^----- tr 12.One Ca) to Sr lr/ Alum Kumar,'SC for'Greater Hyderabad Vfu n cipal N/ -^{Corpor:r.o.Il,pUC]} \ )z 13. Two C -) Cr. c i,-,s

I I

HIGH COIJRT

CC TODAY

DATED:0ItiA72025

\ \

ORDER

WP.No.18681 of 202i

ii. (
() 1.t25
t_)
trl .:
t d
,,:
-. -..-,;.--

¶71

DISPOSIN(; OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOIJI"cOSTS

¶72

,1,-
I
v'

¶73

A M K Constructions Pvt. Ltd. v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

A M K Constructions Pvt. Ltd. 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

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/s. Meenakshi Infrastructures Private Limited Vs Southern Power Distribution Company of Telangana Limited

S.Krupakar Reddy Vs The State of Telangana

M/s. Vinayak Steels Ltd., Vs The Southern Power Distribution Company of

Bethamcharla Yelamanda (Died as per Lr P2) Vs The State of Telangana

Chennoju Bramha Chary Vs The Telangana Southern Power Distribution Company Ltd.

Gajanan Tamra Industries Pvt. Ltd. Vs The State of Telangana