Telangana High Court
WP/27512/2005 of Koduri Ranga Rao S/o Venkata Ratnam Vs Andhra Pradesh Eastern Power Distribution on 26 December 2005
COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE TWENTY SIXTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND FIVE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH WRIT PETITION No. 27512 of 2005 Between: Koduri Ranga Rao ..... PETITIONER AND Andhra Pradesh Eastern Power
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
MONDAY, THE TWENTY SIXTH DAY OF DECEMBERTWO THOUSAND AND FIVE
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH
WRIT PETITION No. 27512 of 2005
Between:
Koduri Ranga Rao
AND
Andhra Pradesh Eastern Power Distribution Company Limited (APEPDCL)rep by the Divisional Engineer, Nadavoll, West Godavari Dist and another
..... PETITIONER
.....RESPONDENTS
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:
Seeking a Mandamus, declaring the action of the respondents in issuing the noticedated 19.03.2005 and taking coercive action without considering the objectionsraised by the petitioners and without passing final orders, as illegal and arbitrary, thepresent writ petition is filed.
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as to the learned standingcounsel appearing for the respondents.
The petitioner submits that he is the Kartha of the undivided Hindu joint family,owning agricultural lands, admeasuring Ac.31.58 cents, situated in different surveynumbers of Malla Varam village, Chagallu Mandal of West Godavari District, andobtained five electricity service connections for the purpose of cultivating the saidlands through bore-wells. It is stated that the petitioner has got two sons and the saidlands are divided among three members i.e. petitioner and his two sons. It is statedthat an extent of Ac.12.71 cents and service connection Nos.190 and 143 was fallentowards the share of petitioner, an extent of Ac.8.91 ½ cents and service connectionNos.118 and 110 was fallen towards the share of one of his son by name KoduriKasi Gangadhararao and an extent of Ac.9.96 cents and service connection No.438was fallen towards the share of his another son by name Koduri Ganesh. It is furtherstated that a notice was given by the respondents on 19.03.2005 as to why the fiveservice connections standing in the name of the petitioner cannot be dissolved forfree electricity service, as an agriculturist is not entitled for free service connection ifhe has more than three connections. No doubt, no explanation has been submittedwithin the prescribed time i.e. within 20.03.2005 as stipulated in the impugnednotice. However, it is stated that a detailed explanation has been filed on 30.07.2005before the 1[st] respondent, bringing all facts to his notice that the lands, according tothe partition, have been mutated in the names of respective sharers i.e. petitionerand his two sons and in support of his contention that the said lands have beenpartitioned among three members, pattadar pass books and title deeds have also been filed, but the said representation/explanation has not been considered anddisposed of by the respondents.
Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, the 1[st] respondent is directed to consider and dispose of the representation of thepetitioner dated 30.07.2005, in accordance with law, after giving a reasonableopportunity to the petitioner, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt ofa copy of this order. Till then, no coercive steps shall be taken.
With the above observations, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No order as to costs.
Dated: 26.12.2005
Dsr
________________
V.ESWARAIAH,J