High Court · 2025

Ibrhaimbagh, nanga Reod, 6iii*t, rdrl"g#I', A:::ru.t#:1T:rEt":"1, operations I brahimbash, tbrahimbagh Ransa 5. Mr. Kishore Kumar Karumanchi, S/o Venkateshwara Rao Aged about 66 h;" ;; 6. Mr. M.V.S. prasad Reddy, S/o M.V. Subba Rao Aged about 39 years. R:io'Zreita' vii; G. 5e riJiuput Virase Ransa ReJdi 7. Mr. S. Vikranth Rectctv Saram, S/o Late S. Shankar Aged about 36 years. occupation . Businesd R/o zr.itr, VirlJ'Xro]'s6'tai;pet Vi,age Ranga Reddy R.^^9,19,y, Sai Kiran, S{o .fgt known to petitioner Aged about 40 years. r.rccuparion . Business R/o xokapeiViri"s; ilil;'R;dd"y DirH;i.i;s,"=# ", B,s, #'; Rv; zil*tJ,"vi)tiilj i z xo r i [ X:: l't r:$.ffi ?'J?j; 33ff3i+3i:"rtX'iness viit s "i' "" S Petition under Articre 226 0f rhe constitution of rndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fired therewith, the High court may be pleased to. issue an appropriate writ, order or direction more particurarly one in ...RESPONDENTS l I the nature of Writ tf lV]andamus declaring the action of resrondents more particularly that of respondent 4 threatening to disconner;tirrg the existing electricity consumer connection bearing No. CBC-3268 for ,uillar No. 3,5, 6,'10, 11,13,17,22,25,28,29.30,31,32,34,40,41, Situated at t<.okapr:t Viilage Ranga Reddy District, cc vered under registered developntent ag -eement dated 467712012, under the,guise of a false complaint lodged by respor,dent No. 5 to 8 without considering the explanation submitted by rne on 15.05.2025 to respondents 3 and.l and without following the due process ol law as being lllegal, Arbitrary Urr Constitutional, being violative of Artick:s 21 and 300A, against the Letter arr,l spirit of Catena of Judgments renrlered by this Honorable court as well that of llonorable Supreme court of lndia apart frcn being violative of principles of rratural Justice and Fair play. lA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed rr support of the petition, the High Court nral be pleased to direct respondents 3 and 4 not to disconnect the electricity suppl)r for meter with SC No. for villas Nc. 3,5,6,10,1 1,13,17,22,25,28,29,30,31 ,32,3,4,,,t0,41 , Situated at Kokapet Village F anga Reddy District, covered under registere d development agreement dated 46?712012, under the guise of a false conrplaint lodged by respondent No. 5 to 3 without considering the explanation submltted by me on 15.o5.2025 to respon(ients 3 and 4, pending the disposal cf preserrt writ petition. Counsel for the Peti,tioner: SRI MOHAMMED AFZAL KHAN Counsel forthe Respondent No.1: AGp FOR ENERGy Counsel for the Respondent No.2 to 4: SRI N.SRIDHAR REDD\., SC FOR TGSPDCL Counsel for the Respondent No.7: SRI N.PAVAN KRISHNA REDDy The Court made the following: ORDER THE HON'BLE SRT JUSTICE NAGESH BHEEMAPAXA WRIT PETITION No.15408 of2o25 ORDER: This writ petition seeking *re following prayer: '...to declare declaring tLE action of respondents more parttcularlg thnt of respondent No.4 in threatening to di.sconnecting the existing electicitg corlsumer connection beaing No. CBC32 68 for uillas No.3, 5, 6, 10, 11, 13, 17, 22, 25,28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 34, 4O, 41 Situated at Kokapet Wttage, Ranga Reddg District couered und.er registered deuelopment agreement dated 4677/2O12 under the guise of a faLse complaint lodged bg respondent Nos.S to 8 raithout consideing the explanation submitted bg him on 15.05.2025 to respondent Nos.3 and 4 and uitlnut follouing tLrc due process of laut as being lllegal, Arbitrary and unconstihttional being uiolatiue of Articles 2 1 and 3OOA against the lEtter and spirit of Catena of Judgments rendered bg this Honorable Court as utell that of Honorable Supreme Court of India apart from being uiolatiue of pinciples of natural Justice.'

2. Heard Mohd.Afzal Khan, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Enerry and Mr.N.Sridhar Reddy, learned standing counsel appearing on behalf of respondent Nos.2 to 4. _- \ J

3. Lt is the case of the petitioner that the petition rr along with his u'ile are the absolute owners and posse'''sors of agricultural land admeasuring Ab'8- 1O gts' ' irr S'r'No'84' Kokapet Villag;e, Rajendra Nagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District having purchzLsed tl.e same under registered sztle deed bearing Doc.No.1326 of 2OO4 dated 16 'O2 '2OO4 and Doc l'lo 4c7l of 2004 dated ,\).O5.2OO4- lt is stated that they have entt red into Development Agreement for construction of 25 irtde pendent villas. Whilt So, respondent authorities acrting upon the complaint su trmitted by respondent Nos'S to 8, are t hr 3atening to disconnec: the electricity supply to the petiti<>ner's vi 'Ias' It is further stat:d that the petitioner has subm itted a representati(,n dated 03.O5.2O24 duly enclosinli all the relevant documents, .-o respondent Nos'3 and 4 requesting not to disconnect th.e electricity supply to the subject prop( rrty' The grievance of t he petitioner is that without considering the said representatirxr dated 03.O5-2O24, the respondetrt autho rities are trying to dis:cnnect the electricity connection Aggri':vt d by the said action :f the respondent authorities, the prer'ent writ petition is filed.

4. Cor sidered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and Iearned Standing counsei I appearing for respondent Nos.2 to 4 and with their consent this writ petilion is disposed of at the admission stage. In view of tfre nature of relief sought in this writ petilion issuance of notice to respondent Nos.5 to 8 is dispensed with.

5. karned Standing Counsel for respondent Nos.2 to 4, on instructions, would submit that the respondent authorities are not disconnecting the electricity supply to the subject property.

6. In view of the submission made by the learned standing counsel for respondent Nos.2 to 4, this writ petition is disposed of directing the respondent authorities not to disconnect the electricit5r connection to the subject property without following the due process of law.

7. With the above observations, this writ petition IS disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs

8. As a sequel, the miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. l ,,TRUE COPY" '"J;lJI$S\3".'JJ cTION OFFICER DePartment, Secretariat'

1. The PrinciPal Secretary, Power and Ene Hvd erabad, State of Telangana he Chairman and Managing Director Office ' 3. Tbc-Assistant Divisio nal Engtneer TSSPDCL' O[eration lbrhaimbagh Hyderabad lbrhaimbagh, Ranga Reddy Distric TSSPDCL at Mint Compound Telangana

2. 1 To, i {ili!;i:!,.. . ,,1 I

4. The Assistant I:ngineer TSSPDCL, Operations lbr.ahimbaglr, lbrahimbagh Ranga ReddY [) strict, Telangana

5. One CC to SRI IvlOHAlVlt\ilED AFZAL KHAN, Advocak; [OPl'JC 6. One CC to SRI l{.PAVAN KRISHNA REDDY, Advocate [OPU( ] 7. ONC 6Q {6I SRI I\.SRIDHAR REDDY, SC FOR TGSPDCL IOPIJC] 8. Two CCs to c,t) FoR ENERGY, High Court for the: Statr: cf Telangana at Hyderabad [OLl l]

9. Two CD CoPie; BSR \q- &i. VACATION COURT HIGH COURT NBKJ DATED:2810512025 t \ : i-\ : S I{7 F ["i 2ii25 t? y / .,t] ,/' / _:) /.< /. -( ltB '\ 1- ORDER WP.No.15408 of 2025 DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION' WITHOUT COSTS Yr- .<x^5