Telangana High Court
WP/16224/2021 of Yalamala Yadhagiri Vs The State of Telangana on 30 December 2022
THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYOERABAO (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE THIRTIETH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY TWO PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.SARATH WRIT PETITION NO: 16224 OF 2021 Between: Yalamala Yadhagiri, S/o Balakishtaiah, Aged about 41 year, Occ: Business,
HIGH COURT [FOR ][THE ]STATE OF [TELANGANA]AT HYOERABAO
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
FRIDAY, THE THIRTIETH DAY OF DECEMBERTWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY TWO
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.SARATH
WRIT PETITION NO: 16224 OF 2021
Between:
Yalamala Yadhagiri, S/o Balakishtaiah, Aged about 41 year, Occ: Business,Rl/o H. No.3-181/6, Ground Floor, Nandhi Hills, Meerpet, Balapur Mandal,R. R. District.
...PETITIONER
AND
1. The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Prl Secretary, Energy Department,Secretariat, Hyderabad.Secretariat, Hyderabad.
2. The Chairman and Managing Director, Telangana State Southern Power,Distribution Company Ltd., Telangana at Hyderabad.Distribution Company Ltd., Telangana at Hyderabad.
3. The Superintendent Engineer, TSSPDCL, Ranga Reddy District.
4. The Divisional Engineer, TSSPDCL, Champapet Dlvision, R. R. District.5. The Asst Engineer, Sub Station, Nandanavanam, Saroornagar Mandal, R. R.District.5. The Asst Engineer, Sub Station, Nandanavanam, Saroornagar Mandal, R. R.District.
...RESPONDENTS
Petition under Artide 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in thecircumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may becircumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may bepleased to issue a Writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature ofWrit of Mandamus, by declaring the against the action of the Respondent No. 4and 5 in non receiving the representations of the Petitioner and non initiating todisconnect the unwanted power/electricity connection in the house of thePetitioner at Plot No.66, Door No.7-98/1 situated at Ambedkarnagar Colony,Meerpet, Saroornagar, R.R. District, as illegal, arbitrary and against the [principles]of natural [justice ]and violative of Article 14, 19,21 of constitution of lndia andconsequently to direct the Respondent No. 4 and 5 to receive the representationsmade by the Petitioner and discon necUd ismantle the unwanted power/electricityconnection in the house of the Petitioner at PIot No.66, Door No.7-98/1, situated atAmbedkarnagar Colony, Meerpet, Saroornagar, R. R. District.Writ of Mandamus, by declaring the against the action of the Respondent No. 4and 5 in non receiving the representations of the Petitioner and non initiating todisconnect the unwanted power/electricity connection in the house of thePetitioner at Plot No.66, Door No.7-98/1 situated at Ambedkarnagar Colony,Meerpet, Saroornagar, R.R. District, as illegal, arbitrary and against the [principles]of natural [justice ]and violative of Article 14, 19,21 of constitution of lndia andconsequently to direct the Respondent No. 4 and 5 to receive the representationsmade by the Petitioner and discon necUd ismantle the unwanted power/electricityconnection in the house of the Petitioner at PIot No.66, Door No.7-98/1, situated atAmbedkarnagar Colony, Meerpet, Saroornagar, R. R. District.
lA NO: 1 OF 2021
Petition unr er Siection 151 CPC praying that in the cir,)urnstances stated inthe affidavit filed irr support of the petition, the High Court mar, be pleased to directthe Respondent f\ o. 4 and 5 to receive the representations lf the Petitioner anddisconnect the t nwanted power/electricity connection in the house of thePetitioner at Plot No.66, Door No.7-9811, situated at Amt e(lkarnagar Colony,Meerpet, Saroornz gar, R.R. Diskict.
Counsel for the Pet tioner: SRI RAPOLU BHASKARCounsel for the Rer pondent Nos.1 to 3: GP FOR ENERGYCounsel forthe Re! pondent Nos.4 & 5: SRI R.VINOD REDDY, SC F()R'l'S TRANSCO
The Court made th( following: ORDER
THE HONOURABLE [SRI ][JUSTICE K.SARATH]
WRIT PETITION [No.16224 ][of ][2O21]
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER:
This writ petition is [filed for ][the ][following ][relief:]
"....to issue writ order [or ][direction ][more]partianlarlg one in the [nahre ][of Wit ][of]Mandamtis, declaring [against ][the ][action ][of ][the]respondent Nos.4 and [5 in ][not ][receiuing ][the]representations of [the ][petitioner ][qnd ][non]initiating to disconnect [the ][unuanted]power/ electicitg connection [in ][the ][house ][of ][the]petitioner ot Plot No.66, [Door ][No.7-98/ ][1, ][situated]at Ambedkarnagar [ColonY, ][MeerPet,]Saroor-nagar, [Ranga ][Reddg ][District, ][as ][illegal,]arbitrary and against [the ][principles ][of ][natural]justice and uiolatiue of Article [14, ][19, ][21 ][of]Constitution [of India. ][. ][. ]["]
2. Heard Sri [Rapolu ][Bhaskar, ][the ][Learned Counsel ][for]the petitioner and [karned ][Government ][Pleader ][for Energr]appearing for the respondent [Nos. ][1 ][to ][3 ][and ][Sri ][R'Vinod]Reddy, Learned Standing [Counsel ][for ][TS ][TRANSCO]aqRearinS [for the ][respondent ][Nos.4 ][and ][5. ]/
t
)
-3. The Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits thatthe petititner is the owner of the plot A,o.66,, Door No.7_98/ I, situated at Ambedkarnagar ()olony, Meerpet,Saroorna5ar', Ranga Reddy District. The petitionerconstruct( d er building and let out the sale on rent basisfrom 2o1ir t. one Madhan Mohan Redd-,; through LeaseDeed daterl O,+.12.2013, as such he established a Hospita_ton the narre ;rnd style of Surya Hospital, a,d he obtained3-Phase tr ectricity power Connection thr,trlgh ConsumerService No.25 1S04116, Exist.Category:2, andNo.251504:t9g. Exist.Category:2, for running hear.ymachines and other equipments in the Hosrpitar and since2013, the raid Madan Mohan Reddy is continuing as aTenant in tlre building of the petitioner. Lel.er, the tenantmet with ar a<:cident and died on 04.06.2021. After hisdeath the ease deed between the petiticner and thedeceased a rtomatically terminated. Thereafter, thepetitioner aporoached the wife of t]le deceas,:d and settled,the [matter, ][then ][the ][petitioner ]intended to clisconnect the\
I
unwanted [electricity ][3-Phase ][Connection ][to his ][buiiding']As such, [the ][petitioner ][approached ][the ][respondent ][No'S]and made [a ][representation ][and ][requested ][to]disconnect/dismantle [the ][unwanted ][Electricity ][connection]to the building, [but ][the ][respondent No'5 refused ][to ][receive]the complaint [and ][did not ][initiate ][to ][consider ][the ][request ][of]the petitioner.
4. Thereafter, [the ][petitioner ][approached ][the ][respondent]No.4andmadearepresentation,buttherespondentNo.4also refused [to ][consider ][the representation ][of ][the petitioner']Therefore [the ][petitioner ][approached ][this ][Court and ][filed]this Writ [Petition' ][As ][the ][respondents ][are ][not ][disposing ][of]the representation [of ][the ][petitoenrs' ][the ][present ][writ]petition is [frled.]
5. LearnedStandingCounselfortherespondentssubmitapplication [dated]that the Petitioner [has filed ][an]06.O7.2O2L [to ][dismantle ][Service ][Connection' ][After ][receipt]of the application, [the oflicials of the ][respondent No'2 ][have]\/
-l
visited the premises where the Se -r.ice connection islocatec and it was noticed that Sri S rrya Multi SpecialtyHospit,rl is being run in the said premises. The petitionerhas file d a Lease Deed dated O4.l2.2OL:i which reveals thatthe prt mises constructed on plot No.b6 is leased to SriSurya ivlulti Speciarty Hospitar. The lerrse <leed is in forceup to 31 .12.2023. The power r;upply cannot bedisconnectr::d as a Hospital is being run in the premises byutilizing the power from the Service Connection. It issubmitt,:d that the petitioner has stated in his Affidavit thata persotr b-y name Mr.Madhan Mohan Red,1y who is thetenant o'the premises and where Sri Surya IVIulti Specia_lityHospital is being run has expired on o4.o6.2o2i,. Thepetitione' should have made the regar hr:irs of Mr.MadhanMohan Redcly as parties to this Writ pet tion and the WritPetition i; liable to be dismissed for not ;mpleading properand necessary parties. It is further submitted that theresponderrts are not empowered to disconrrect power supplywhen the prcrperty is in possession of ten;lnts or any other,./
persons. The petitioner has to [seek ][recourse to ][Civil ][Courts]to lor appropriate remedY.
6. After hearing both sides and in [view ][of ][the]submission made by the [learned ][Standing ][Counsel ][for ][the]respondents, the writ [petition ][is ][liable ][to ][be ][dismissed- ][as]Sri Surya Multi Speciality [Hospital ][is ][being ][run ][in ][the]scheduled property and [a,lso ][not ][impleading the proper ][and]necessa{/ parties.
7Accordingly, the Writ Petition [is ][dismissed. ][There shall]no order as to costs.
8. Miscellaneous petitions [pending, ][if ][any, shall ][stand]closed.
SD/-K.VENKAIAHASSTSTANT-REGTSTRAR+lbSECTION OFFICER
//TRUE COPY//
To1. Two CCs to GP FOR ENERGY, High Court for the State of Telangana, atHyderabad. IOUT]2. One CC to SRI RAPOLU BHASKAR, Advocate IOpUCI4. 3. One CC to SRt R.V|NOD REDDY, SC FoR TS iRANSbO topuclTwo CD CopiesPSK.SWPmq.
HIGH COU ?T
DATED:3011212022
ORDERWP.No.16224 of 2021
DISMISSIN{i I.HE WRIT PETITIONWITHOUT [(;OISTS.]
?$e.,3o\r \r-s
:iHE ST4I{t; 4 I u 1 Frq r [q.']?t23,-.r'.