The High Court · 2025

Petition under section 1s1 cpc praying that in the circumstances stated in the.affidavit filed n support of the petition, the High court may be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to re-fix the electricity meters bearin,3 s.c.No. 69462 and 69546 to the premises bearing H.No. 18-8-50gl1l2otc situated at Akber Nagar, Kumarwadi Colony, Edi Bazar, Hyderabad by restoring the power supply, pending disposal of the main Writ petition, in the interest.of justicer. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI MR MOHD ABDUL HAt Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 TO 3: SRI N.SREEDHAR REDDy, SC FOR Counsel for the Respondent No.4: SRI MOHAMMED ABDUL QUADEER The Court made the following: ORDER TELANGANA TRANSCO o HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE SUREPALLI NANDA RIT E o No 1 oF 20 4 ORD E Heard Sri Mohd. Abdul Hai' learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner' Sri N' Sreedhar Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for TS Transco appearing on behalf of respondent Nos'1 to 3 and Sri Mohammed Abdul Quadeer, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the resPondent No'4'

2. The petitioner approached the Court seeking prayer as under: Writ order or direction "... to issue an aPProPriate the nature of Writ of more Particula rlY one in Mandamus declaring the inaction of the respondent authorities in taking steps to refix/restore the electricity meters bearing S'C' No'69462 and 69546 to the petitioner's premises bearing H ' No' 18-B- 5Og/l/2O/C situated at Akber Nagar' Kumarwadi Colony, Edi Bazar, Hyderabad which were taken away on i-.B/4/2024 without any reasons followed by personal visits as being illegal' arbitrary' unjust u nconstitutiona I and colourable exercise of powers and consequently direct the respondent authorities to refix the electricity meters to the above 2 w) 15125 2024 mentioned premises by restoring the power s;upply and to grant such other relief or reliefs a:; this Honourable Court deems fit and proper in the circu msta nces of the case...".

3. It is the specific case of the petitioner that house bearing rnunicipal Door No. lB-B-589/t/20/C, EtTi Bazar, Kumarwadi Colony, Hyderabad belongs to petitioner's grandmother i.e. Smt. Late Rabia bee and the petitioner had been lawful owner of the said house along with p€rtitioner,s grandmother and had been enjoying the L.lectricity consumption by paying the electricity bills to the company regularly. Though the petitioner had been prompt and regular in payment of electricity charges to the respondent authorities;, the electricity service connection to the meter No. 69462, 69546 had been disconnected unlawfully on L8.04.2024 and the officials respondents had taken away the petitioner's electricity meters in illegal manner. Since then there was no electricity in the subject premises of the petitioner. The petitioner made a request rzrde repre:;entation dated 27.05.2024 for restoration of the electricity meter No.69462, 69546 in respect of the premises No.1B_g_ n 3 wP 15125 2024 5[gl1,l2O/C, situated at Akber nagar' Kumarwadi Colony' Edi Bazar, Hyderabad, which had been acknowledged by the office of the Managing Director, TGSPDCL' Corporate Office' Mint ComPound, HYderabad on 27.05.2024. However, no action had been initiated in response to petitioner's request forrestorationoftheSUbjectelectricityservicemeters Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner filed the present writ petition

4. Counter affidavit has been filed by respondent Nos'1 to 3 and the learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of respondent Nos.1 to 3 placing reliance on the averments made in the counter affidavit filed by the respondent Nos'1 to 3 in particular para Nos'2 to 5 contends that the electricity meters bearing S.C' No' 69462 and 69546 had been removed and that civil disputes are pending between the petitioner and the respondents and the disputes need to be adjudicated by the comPetent civil Court' 5, Learned counsel appearing on behalf of unofficial respondent No.4 placing reliance on the averments made in the counter affidavit filed by the 4th respondent submits that 4 \P 15t2s 2024 the petit oner has no right or claim over the subject property and the electricity service connections sought for is only to create o\r/nership over the subject premises and that. there are civil disputes pending between the petitioner and the 4th respondent and the petitioner had wrongly misrepresented the facts and therefore, the petitioner is not entifled For any relief as sought for in the present writ peiltion. PER ED HE EC D

6. Section 43 of the Electricity Act, 2OO3 reads as u nder: "Serction 43. (Duty to supply on request) (1)(Save as otherw distr ibution ) licensee, hall on a rse provided in th is Act, every f Provided that where such supply requires extension of distribution mains, or commissioning of ne.w sub-stations, the distributi"., ii""".ee shall supply the electricity to such premises immediately after such extensibn or commissioning or within such period as may be specified by the Appropriate Commissioni Provided further_ that in case of a village or hamlet or area wherein no provisi,on i* ,"ppfy ot electricity exists, the Approp.iate iom-rnission 5 mav extend the said Period n"cL.s".Y for electrification hamlet or area. wP 15125 2024 as it may consider of such village or

7. The APex in LiveLaw (SC) 453 the Judgment reported in 2(J23 in between K.C.Ninan Vs' Kerala stateofElectricityBoardandotherspassedinCivil Appeal Nos.21O9 and 2110 ol 2OO4' dated 19'O5'2023' observed as under: 2 3 A ao 4 The dutY to "El supply electricitY under Secti on 43 is with resPect to the owner or occupier of the Premises. The 2003 Act contemp lates a synergy betwe en the consumer and premises. Under Section 43, when electricitY ts supplied, the owner or occuPier becomes a consumer onlY with resPect to those Particular premises for which electricity s sought and Provided by the Electric Utilities The Apex Court in its Judgment reported in (2O11) 8 12 Supreme Court Cases 314 in between Chandu Khamaru Vs. Nayan Malik and Others passed in Civil Appeal No.7575 of 2011 dated O2'O9'2O11 observed as under: Sub-section (1) of Section 42 and sub-section (1) of Section i:""ir#E"i*citv nct, 2003 are quoted herein below: "42. Duties of distribution licensees and open access-(1) It shall be the duty of a Jistribution licensee to develop and maintain an eficient co-ordinate and economical I I l I I 6 , sN,J wP t5125 2024 distribution system in his area of supply and to supply electricity in accordance with the provisions contained in thir; Act. " "4Ii. puty to supply on request-(1) Save as otherwise prc,vided in this Act, every distribution Iicensee, shall, on an application by the owner or occupier of any prernises, give supply of electricity to such premises, within one month after receipt of the application requiring such supply.,, 7. It will be clear from sub-section (1) of Section 42 that every distribution licensee has a duty to develop and maintain an efficient co-ordinated and economical distribution system in his area of supply and to supply electricity in accordance with the provisions contained in this Act. Sub-section (1) ,cf Section 43 p-rovides that every distribution licensee, ihull, on un applic,ation by the owner or occupier of any premrses, give supply, of electricity to such premises, within one month after receipt of the application requiring such supply,. These a u o Dremises Iocated in the area of suool vofel r n A r it m f r wn r a r h n MI h r r t r rom e n distribution licen 12, The case of the appellant, on the other hanrl, is that this passage is not a private passa ge of respondent Nos.1 to 3 but rs : common passage and the refore an electric lirre can be drawn through this common passage. This dispute will have to be resolved in Civil Suit No.83 of 2004 pendi ng in the Court s u DA ies. electricitv to his house. the a Della tca not b ede ied u oolv of rD tsr H s 11: y'Ve, therefore, set aside the order of the learned Single Judge as well as the impugned order of the Division Bench and dispos€, of the Writ petition of respondent nos.1 to 3 with the direction that the distribution licensee will find oui wnether there is any other way in which electric tine can be- drawn for supply of electricity to the house of the appellant, other than (-, 1 wP 15125 2024 the disputed passage in Dag Nos'406,4O7 and 409' Ifthere is way to- supply electricity to the. house of the "" "tfi* upp"fiuni, the distribution licensee will follow the provisions of tr6-.".tion (2) of Section 67 of the Electricity Act' 2003 for il-," work for supply of electricity to the house of ."..V-i"g "rt the appellant.

9. The Apex Court in the Judgment reported in 2()22 Livelaw 57O in between Dilip (dead) through LRs Vs' Satish and others passed in CRLA No'81O ol 2(J22 (arising out of Specia! Leave petition (CRL)No'8917 of 2O19, dated L3,O5-2O22 observed as under: \t is not disPuted that aPP licant No.1 has obtained the connection of electricitY' The submissions made show that aPPlicant No. 1 is inp ossession of the shoP and he is running a saloon shoP It is clear that he needs electricity for doing this business' but.the first informant was not giving no objection certificate. He took every step to see that aPplicant No' 1 does not get supPlY of electricitY for his business. It is not the case of the APP licant No. 1 that as Per the agreement between him and landlord, the lan dlord is bound to suPPlY the the Ele ncl electricitY. obiection of I ndlord onlv to verifv that the DOS SCSSIon urpose nant is a uthorised There is no other of the Th suchnoob ctio revent th S in ln lord ca n not facilitv at hi s own cost Iti sn wwell settledo oos tion ofl wt at of which a Derson itv isa basi am enl ca not bed eclined to ate ant ont eq un offailu lr usa of the la dlordto issueno obi ctionce ificate. AII that a from lan lo ten ntf m eortved. Ele B ard see hin obt Fu her SN tV a h n s ts n h r c r nt fo no h m 8 .1 \tt P 15125 2024 g.u-estr0!!-1 Be that as it may, the High Court clearl y fell in t:rror in quashing the FIR. It cannot be said that fa brication and/or creation of records and/or forging a signature does not constitute an offence under the Indian Penal Code. The Hi gh Court completely ove.looked the definition of ch eating in Section 4L5 of the IPC. It ma.l ecl is ho SUD rICI r r thatel d U all n e U m C e r n m n NC ti n m sa me. " ,l

10. This Court opines that the grievance of the petitioner as put forth in the representation dated 27.O5.2O24 addressed to the Chairman, Managing Director, TGSPDCL, Hyderabad needs to be considered in accordance to law, since pendency of civil disputes cannot be a ground for denia! oi electricity service power supply as per Section 43 of the Electricity Act, 2OO3 and atso as per the view laid down by the Apex Court in the Judgments referred to and extracted above. The Writ petition is disposed of directing the respondent No.3 to consider the grievance of the petitioner as put forth by the petitioner in the representation dated 27.O5.2O24 addressed to the Chairman, Managing Director, TGSPDCL, Hyderabad by 9 wP rs125 2o); giving an opportunity of personal hearing to both the petitioner and the 4th respondent duly considering the view of the Apex Court in similar situataons as indicated in judgments of the Apex Court (referred to and extracted above) and pass appropriate orders in accordance to law, in conformity with principles of naturat justice, within a period of two (2) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. However, there shall be no order as to costs. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this Writ Petition, shall stand closed. //TRUE COPY// SD/- P.C AS h. NAGABHUSHAMBA ISTANT REGISTRAR ECTION OFFICER to ., Distribution ComPanl I,,,, chairman and rr/rfl,?.1',:g:^[:.?S:J;f,]r.1iir:5,E:!-::': t'.-"1 2. rhe su peri nteno i n g i ;iii ni"ei'isijFb-ci-: aopeiatib n t So uth' Hvderabad 3. The Divisionur eng'n""i' i"stpddl'*o#ti't6n' citv Vl I l' Asmansadh' + ij'"["ctT,i s1t ruR IuoHD ABDUL Hnt' novocaterfiffiANA ;. il; dc i; SRi rl-sneroHnR REDDY, sc FoR u boIJ"% to SRI MoHAMMED ABDUL QUADEER' Advocate toPUCl 7. Two CD CoPies Hvderabad. TRANSC. PSK. GJP HIGH COURT DATED:0310212025 ORDER WP.No.15125 of 2024 , -.- ---- __ j.'.|' 2 5 tttAil ,. 'J s..ti. t1 'Ia H 3 { DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS