N'Kalpana v. The Telangana Southem Power Distribution Company Lt9

Petition Under Section 151 cPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fired in support of the petition, the High court may be preased to direct the Respondent No'5 not to interfere with the peacefur ownership and possession of the petitic,ner pending disposal of the present writ petition. Counsel for the petitioner : SRI GOLAMARU VENKATA REDDy Counset for the Respondent Nos.l to 4 : SRI N.SREEDHAR neOOV Counsel for the Respondent No.S : G.p FOR REVENUE The Court made the foltowing ORDER MRS JUSTICE SUREPALLI NANDA w P TIT N 2 4 o 20 ORDER: . Heard Sri G.V.Reddy, learned counsel appearing on behalfofthe'petitioner,SriN.SreedharReddy,learned Standing Counsel for TGSPDCL appearing on behalf of the respondent Nos.1 to 4 and the learned Government Pleader for Revenue appearing on behalf of the respondent No'5' 2 Th u nder: o a a e u r one in a writ, order the nature of or direction more Writ of Mandamus pa rticularlY declaringtheactionoftheRespondentNo.3Straightway a giving sufficient time SC No.2777O55OO" without at the order of the 5th whatsoever to the Petitioner, respondent as wholly illegal, arbitrary, unjust and against the principles of natural justice and to consequently direct the Respondent No.3 to restore the service connection for the etectricity meter bearing SC No'2777O55OO and pass such other order or orders as deemed fit and proper in the circumstances of the case and interest of justice." 2 SN,J wP 2648 2025 by paying

3. The case of the petitioner, in brie, is that the petitioner is the absolute owner and possessor of the property bearing plot No.12 admeasuring -500 sq. yards in sy.No.278, bearing house No.38_ L5/92/t, Vinobha Nagar, Neredmet, Malkajgiri Mandal and District, having purchased the same through an unregistered agreement of sale dated 28.01.1999 from one Mr. K. Laxminarayana valid sale consideration of Rs.5,00,000/_ and residing there since 2005. As per the poricy formed by the State Government, the petitioner applied for regularization of the subject property on payment basis as per G.O.Ms.No.59 dated 30.t2.2014 by paying requisite amount, but the same is pending as on date. R.ecently, the petitioner dismantred the existing house to build a new house. While the matter stood thus, the respondent No.3 issued a notice of disconnection of current supply vide No.ADE/OplAS Rao Nagar/F.No. Land Dispute D.No.44/24_25, dated 10.01.2025 to the petitioner and discrrnnected the erectricity suppry basing on the orders of the Respondent No. 5 due to dispute over the ownership. The petitioner submitted representations to the Erectricity Department and the Tahsildar, but they have refused to restore the electricity connection. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner filed the present writ petition. 3 SN,J wP 264E 2025 PERUSED THE RECORD

4. Learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent Nos.1 to 4 submits that even as per the averments made in the affidavit filed in support of the present writ petition at paragraph No.B,'the subject land is open and vacant land since the petitioner had himself dismantled two rooms covered with ACB sheets, hence, the petitioner is not entitled for the relief as sought for in the Present writ Petition' Learned Standing Counsel further submits that the impugned 5. notice dated 10.01.2025 may be treated as showrcause notice and the petitioner may be directed to furnish the explanation to the said notice and file relevant documents in support of petitioner's claim that the petitioner is the owner of the subject land' within a reasonable period and thereafter' the respondents would consider the said explanation to be the same and pass appropriate orders on examining the relevant furnished by the petitioner after duly documents to be submitted by the petitioner along with the said explanation. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner' on the ona letter of Mandal Revenue 6 other hand, submits that based 4 SN,J '\w 264E 2025 officer, the impu,gned proceedings cannot be unirateraily issued to the petitioner and the same is highly illegal and arbitrary.

7. A bare perusal of the impugned proceedings dated 70.07.2025 issuerJ by the 3.d respondent admittedly as borne on record, clearly indicates that on the basis of the letter of the respondent No.5 dated 09.01.2025 which is indicated in reference of the impugned prroceedings dated 10.01.2025 of the respondent No'3, the impugned notice dated Lo.or.2025, had been issued to the petitioner, without issuing any prior notice to the petitioner. 8, Learned Assis;tant Government pleader for RevEnue places on record written instructions dated 04.02.2025 and contends that the subject rand is Government rand and the same had been arotted to ESI dispensary as per the orders of the District Collector. 9 This Court opines that the respondent Nos.2 to 5 are bound to cannot unilaterally disconnect an follow due process of law and existing electricity power supply.

10. e to 43 of he le o 3 "Section 43. (Duty to supply on request) t a a u ( 1) [Save licensee, c as otherwise p n f o r vided in this Act, every distribution a e ve u e e rrc t l r f 5 a e with u in s o e h SN,J wP 264E 2025 h e re of th Providedthatwheresuchsupplyrequiresextensionof distribution mains, or commissioning of new sub-stations' the the. electricity to such distribution licensee .naLt ',ppty i."#ir"t-i*.ediately urt"t t'in extension or commissioning :i1;iffi ;;;'il;;;i;i u' 'uv be specirred bv the Appropriate i"r"ritti""' 1'Subs. UV ncr 26 of 2oO7' Sec'B for the words "Every distribution" Provided further that in case of a village or hamlet or area'whereinnop.oui,ionforsupplyofelectricityexists,the eppi"p.lit" Commission may extend the said period as it may consider necessary for etectiification of such village or hamlet or area. tnil sub-section' 1[Explanation.- For the purposes of "j;;[;;il;; *"un, *re'appticatiol coTplgl: in all respects in tnl"appropriate form, as iequired by the distribution licensee' .r""g-;ritli documents tno*ing payment of netessary charges and other comPliances'l (2) It shall be the duty of every distribution licensee to plant or electric line for sivins ;;4ril":'ii';"[ri*0, "r"tttit Ei#n. trop,v"fo in" ptu'ites specified in sub-section (1) : . Provided that no person shall be entitled to demand' or to continue to ,[I"i'", from a licensee a supply of supply electricity for any unlesshenu,ujteLJwiththelicenseetopaytohim such price as determined by the Appropriate having a -pl."rnises -separate Commission. (3) If a distribution licensee fails to supply the electricity within the period speci-if]eO-in tun-s"ction (1)' he shall be penalty *ni.n rnuv extend to one thousand rupees ii.til t" for each daY of default." " 6 I SN.J wr2AU_zoz5 I "The duty to suPply electricity under Section 43 is with respect to the owner or occupier oF the premises. The 2003 Act co ntemplates a synergy betwe and premiSes. Under en the consumer ection 43 en electri city ts supplied, the owner or Wh occupier becom es a consum er only respect to rhose particula r electri city is sought and provid ed by th e Electric Utilities.,, mises For which Th e A ex Co urt In its Ju dq en S t Dre ort !n oI 1) 1 rt Ca d s e o d o2 o 11 b s e c I c I o 7 t n 4 of p ection (1) of Se tio stributio n system in on 42 and sub_s re quoted herein below: "Sub-section (1) of Secu the Electrici ty Act 2003 a "42. Duties of distributron licensees and open acces s-(1) It shail be the d uty ot' a distribution licensee efficient co-ordinated a to develo and maintain an nd eco nomical di area of supply, and to supply electricity in acco rdance with the provision s contained in this Act.', "43. Du ty to sLtpply o n reguest_ (1) Save as other this Act every djstrib ution,icens wise provided i owne r or occupi er of any Prem ises give supply of electrici ty to n Y the such Premises, within one month after receipt of the application requirrng such s upply." 7 It will be clear from sub_se ction (1) of distribution licens ee has a duty to develop and mainti In an efficient co-ordinated an economical dis and to suppl ctricity in a in this Act. Sub-:;ection (7) or distribution Iice nsee, shall ona ystem in hi s.area of sup plY th the srons contai Section 43 p es that ev n application by the owner or shall onana pplication b tribution s ccordance wi 2 that every d y ele c n { 7 SN,J \\ry 2648 2025 er of anY Prem ises, g ive suPPlY of electricitY to such Premises, one month after receipt of the applicatio n requiring such occu pl within supply. c n t e s h r f n e

10. passag f su oolvf mthe dis ibu ion licensee. The case of the aPPellant e is not a Private Passage o on the other hand, is that this f respon dent Nos.1 to 3 but is a common passag e and therefore an electric line can be drawn through this common Passage. This dispute w ill have to be resolved in Civil r Suit No.83 of 2004 Pending in the Co urt D rs t 11 . We, therefore, set aside the order of the learned Single Judge as well as the impug ned order of the Divisio n Bench and disPose of the Writ Petition of resPo ndent nos.1 to 3 with the direction that the distribution licensee wt il find out whether there is anY other waY in which electric line can be drawn for suPPlY of electricitY to the hou SE of the aPPellant, other than the disPuted Passage in Dag Nos.40 4O7 and 409. If there is no other way to suPPlY electricitY to the the distribution licensee will follow the house of the aPpellant' -section (2) of Section 67 of the Electricity Act, provisions of sub out the work for suPPlY of electricitY to the house 2003 for carrYrng of the aPPellant. " 6, e t e n s T e t eJ d r L e 5 o n h s as e o of2 2 t c L I n v r t2 1 a e 5 o2 b e "It is not connection of applicant No. r e a disputed that applicant No'1 has obtained the electricitv. The submrssions ma.de :111-:l:t-' 1"i;;;';;:t"tsion of the shop and he is runntns 8 r- SN,J wP 2648 2025 a saloon shop. It is clear that he needs electrici ty for doing this b usinL.ss, but the first informant was not giving no objection certificate. He took eve ry step to see that applicant No, 1 does not get suppl yofel ectricity for his business. It is not the case of the Ap licant No. 1 that as per the a9reement between him and land ord, the landlord is bound to supply the electricity. t Io s p e e h a h e o e n n m Ii h n C n CV t I l'il h Be that as it may, the High Court clearly fell in error in guashi ng the FIR. It canh ot be said that fabrication and/or creation of records and/or forging a signature does not constitute an offen ce under the Indian Penal Code. The High Court completely overlooked the definition of cheati the IPC. It is.however ng in Section 415 of d n U e S d n o s m same." I 4. Takinot ns d eration: a) The submissions made by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and the !earned Standing Counset appearing on behalf of the respondent Nos.1 to 4 and, o SN,J wP 2648 2025 b) The view of the Apex Court in the judgments (referred to and extracted above) and again entisted below, i) "K.C.Ninan Vs. Kerala State of Electricity Board and others" ii) "Chandu Khamaru Vs. Nayan Malik and Others,, iii) "Dilip (dead) through LRs Vs. Satish and I I others" c) The fact as borne on record that petiUoner apptied for regularization of the subject property on payment basis as per G.O.Ms.No.S9 dated 3O.L2.2O14 by paying requisite amount and the same is pending consideration as on date by the Government, d) The fact that even if state is the owner, the due procedure as per law cannot be ignored, and due process of law needs to be necessarily followed, The writ petition is allowed and the impugned proceedings No-ADE/OPIAS Rao Nagar/F.No.Land Dispute t0 a SN,J wP 2648 2025 D.No.44/24-25 dated 10.01.2025 is set aside and the respondents are directed to foflow due process of law. However, there shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, the miscellaneous petitions, any, pending in the Writ petition shall also stand closed. SD/.P. CH. NAGABHUSHAMBA ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPYII TION OFFICER To Secunderabad.

1. The Managing Director, Telangana Southern power Distribution Company Ltd' 1st Floor, 33/1 1 KV Lumbiii park Substation Roao No. 1 2, saifabad- Khairatabad, Hyderabad_500004. Hyderabad for favour of information. 2 Ihg Superintending Engineeri TGSPDCL, (Operations)/Flbsiguda, 3. The Assistant Divisional Engineer, Operations, A.S. Rao Nagar, TGSpDCL, 4 !1" Divr'sional En5;ineer, operation/sainikpuri secunderabad, for favour of 5. The Tahsildhar. Matkaigiri Mandal District Medchal- Malkajgiri. 6. Two CC's to c.p FoR iEVENUE, HighA;rrt r"rjn. State of Tetangana at 7. One CC to SRI GOLAMARUVE_ryKATA REDDY, Advocate tOpUCl B. One CC to SRt N.SREEDHAR REDDY, AdvocatetOpUCl 9. Two CD Copies Hyderabad. (OUT) information. SA BS ) I I C.C. TODAY HIGH COURT DATED:0 510212025 ORDER WP.No.2648 of 2025 4 i-I"' t' 4) i. .i + 1j r r ,l Iii2 rJ r) t. DISPOSING OF THE W.P WITHOUT GOSTS.