Chamala Vidhyadhar v. 1. The State of Telangana

Petition Under Article 226 ot the constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High court may be pleased to issue any appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of a writ of Mandamus. a. Declaring the action of Respondents in refusing to provide electricity connection in respect of Registration No LTM25222OO18 to the commercial building situated in Plot No. 5 (Eastern part), i I / h I I i '. Plot No. 6 (Eastern part), Plot No. 8, Plot No. 15, and Plot \:r. 16 (Southern Part), totally admeasuring '1 335.25 square meters situated in Survi:y Nos. 561 , 589 and 503 of KAPRA locality, Kapra Village, Kapra Mandal, Medchal - Malkajgiri District, falling under the jurisdiction of Kapra Circle 'l . LB Nagr'rr Zone. Hyderabad, Telangana State, on the ground that an Occupancy Cerr ificate has not been produced, as being wholly arbitrary, illegal, unconstitutiona ;rnd in gross violation of the rights of the Petitioner apart from being in contravr:ntion of the law laid down by this Honourable Court and set aside the same a rd, b. Consequently, direct the Respondents to provide electricity connection to the commercial building situated in Plot No. 5 (Eastern part), Plot No.6 (Ei:s;tern part), Plot No.8, Plot No. 15. and Plot No. 16 (Southern Part), totally admeas rring 1335.25 square meters situated in Survey Nos. 561, 589 and 503 of Kr\PRA locality, Kapra Village, Kapra [,4andal, Medchal - tt/lalkajgiri District, fallinq under the jurisdiction of Kapra Circle 1, LB Nagar Zone, Hyderabad, Telangana l:itate without insisting on production of Occupancy Certificate. i.A.NO:1 OF 2025 Petition Under Section 151 CPC praying that in the ciroumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Co-rr': may be pleased to direct Respondents to forthwith process the Petitioners ap6rlication for electricity supply connection bearing Registration No. LTIM2522l?0018 and provide electricity supply to the commercial building situated in Plot No. 5 (Eastern part), Plot No. 6 (Eastern part), Plot No. 8, Plot No. 15, and Plot No. 16 (Southern part), admeasuring a total extent of 1335.25 square meters in S.rrvey Nos. 561 , 589, and 503 of KAPRA locality, Kapra Village, Kapra [\/and: i, Medchal-Malkajgiri District, falling within the jurisdiction of Kapra Circle 'l , LB Nagar Zone, Hyderabad, Telangana State, without insisting on produr;t,tn of an Occupancy Certificate. Counsel for the Petitioner : Ms. P.SHRAVYA REDDY Counsel for the Respondent No.1 : GP FOR MCPL ADMN !,ND URBAN DEVELOPMENT Counsel for the Respondent No.2 : G.P FOR ENERGY Counsel for the Respondent Nos.3 to 5 : SRI N.SREEDHAR REDDY Counsel for the Respondent No.6 : SRI SRINIVAS RAO PACHWA, SC FOR GHMC The Court made the following ORDER ':.rt!{tt a HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NAGESH BHEEMAPAKA U/RIT PETITION No.23321 OF 2()25 ORDER: In this Wrjl Petition, a direction is sought to Respondents - TGSPDCL to provide eiectrici$ L-' )nnection [o commercial building in Plot No. 5 (Eastern Palt, Plot No 6 (Eastern Part), Plot No. 8, Plot No. 15 and Plot No l{r (Southern Part), totally admeasuring 1335.25 square meters ir Survel' Nos' 561, 589 and 503 of Kapra Village and Mar'l'-Ll. Medchal- Malkajgiri Districl falling under the jurisdiction of i. Lpra Circle 1, LB Nagar Zone, Hyderabad without insisting on :rroduction of 'occupancy certificate' from Greater HyderabrlC Municipal Corporation.

2. Pctitioner claims to be the absoh.rt,' o$'ner and possessor o1' subject prope rry. It is stated, they coll s,tructed ccllar + stilt + ground floor + three upper floors ac: oxling to the approved sanctioned p1an. They have also paid all tl-rr: requisite fee / charges / challans to the respondents for electrir: t5' connection and the same uras also sanctioned on 19.(r11 2025. But respondents did not release power supply on thc ground that 'occupancy certihcate' \ ,as not submitted, whi, rh condition, T 't 't t ,J 2 according to petitioner, is not a mandatory. It is stated, petitioner had applied ot 27 .06.2025 to the 6& respondent se eking bccupancy certificate' in respect of the building and also for issuance of Fire NOC and the said Application is pending consideration before the competent authority. Hence, the Writ Petition.

3. Heard learned counsel for petitioner Ms. P. Shrarya Reddy. She contends that this Court in several Writ Petitions direcled respondents to release porr,,er supply to the premises of petitioner therein subject to compliance with the terms and conditions and on furnishing an undertaking to produce the occupancy certihcate from the Municipal Corporation concerned within a prescribed pcriod and if no such occupancy certihcate is produced within the stipulated period, it is open to respondents to take appropriate action in accordance with law. Hence, similar order may be passed even in this Writ Petition also.

4. Sri N. Sreedhar Reddy, Iearned Stalding Counsel for TGSPDCL submits that based on the above order, the authorities have been releasing power supply, without insisting on production of occupancy certificate and on the assurance given by the parties that they would furnish the said certihcate at a later Ir I' J f'.1 date, however, they are not turning up with the c()rtlficates at all and enjoying the power supply. Hence, learned Strrrrrling Counsel prays to take the said aspect rnto consideration.

5. Heard Sri Srinivasa Rao Pachwa, learned Standing Counsel for GHMC.

6. Evidentiy, TGSPDCL in their lel[er dated

19.O5.2025 addressed to petitioner specifically mentioned that 'no seruice conn ection sholl be releosed for multi-stor;.ec,!. buiLdings / complexes greater than 10 meters in height unie:;s occupancA certificate Jiom the authoities concerned is procluced'. T!;e Corporation also granted building permit datct . 23.O1.2023 Subject to 1,he conditions that public amenities l; rch as water supply, electricity connections will be provided on11 ( ,n producLion of occupancy certihcate. Petitioner, however, without questioning Lhe said conditron, cannot seek indulgcnce of Lhis Co.rrt nolr'.

7. Though learned counsel for petitioner- placcs strong reliance on various orders, with great respect, this (.)ourt inclines to take a slight departure, for, several buildings al: ntushrooming after getting approval for a particular plan, therci:.fter giving a go-by, additional floors are being raised unscrupu ir_151y and the parties are applying for building regularisatio:r scheme for ,t r( T 1 i t, t, t, 4 legalising the said unauthorised structures and the civic body is not able to touch these structures. This Court cannot be a mute spectator for such unceremonious procedure and does not want to encourage this type of activity in the interest of socrety at large.

8. The above-said opinion of this Court is justified by the recent judgment in Rajendra Kumar Barjatga a. U.P. Aoas Eaqm Vikas Po,rishadl wherein, the Hon'b1e Supreme Court in the larger public intcrest, issued directions in addition to the directives issued in Re: Directions in the matter of demolition of structures. Relevant for the purpose of this case are: (iv) Ail the necessary service connections, such as, triectricity, water supply, sewerage connection, etc., shall be given by the service provider / Board to the buildrngs only after the production of the completion / occupation certificate. (v) Even after issuance of completion certificate, deviation / violation if any ccntrary Lo the planning permission brought to the notice of the authority immediate steps be taken by the said authority concerned, in accordance with law, against the builder / owner / occupant; and the offrcial, who is responsible for issuance ' 2024 SCC Online SC 3767 5 of u,rongful corrrpletion / occupation certificate shall be proceeded depa rtmen ta lly l'orlhwit h. (vi) No permission / licence to conduct any businesis / Lrade must be given by any authorities including local bodies ol :ltates /Union Territories in any unauthorised building irrcspec ti,,c of it being residential or commcrcial building. (vii) The development must be in conformity with the zonal plan land usage. Any modihcation to such zonal plan artrl usage must bc taken by strictly following the rules in ptzrce land in consideration of the larger public interest and the rrnpact on the environment.

9. In view of the law laid down by the H:l.r'ble Supreme Court making production of occupancy certificaLt: ,/ compietion certihcate as condition precedent for releasing pou.c: supply and also in view of the rampant misuse of the liberty 33 ar-rted by this Court to the parties on several occasions, with regard to non- insistence o[ Occupancy Cerlihcate, this Court takt:s serious notc of the situation. i 0. Therefore, the Writ Petition is dispor;c C of directing petitioner to approach the municipal authorities ::r. ncerned hrst ..2' I f, 6 for issuance of occupancy certilicate. On producing such certilicate only, respondent - TGSPDCL shail consider the case of petitioner for release of electricity connection, in accordance with law. No costs.

11. closed The miscellaneous Applications, if any shall stand //TRUE COPY// SD/-A. JAYASREE TANT REGISTRAR S ECTION OFFTCER To

3. Hvderabad. The PrinciPa I Secretary, MuniciP al Administration an Department, Secretariat, State of Telangana at HYde The PrinciPa I Secretary, Power and Energy Department, Secretariat, State of Telangana at HYd erabad - 5OO022. The Chairman and Managing Director, So uthern Power Distribution Company of Telangana State Ltd, Having its corpora te office at 6-1-50, Mint ComPound' Hvderabad - 500063. rban DeveloPment ad - 500022 Tankbund Zone, HYderabad.

4. T#"ihi"f Eng-iiliibp"t"tion Medchal Zone Corporate office' TGSPDCL' 5 ilG ffi;i;dnt Divisional Engineer, Operation Sainlkpuri Sub-Division' O. ftr-e Comniissioner, Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation' Lower z. ii,.'cdJt" cF'rcjn rtrdpi ADMN AND URBAN DEVELoPMENT' Hish B. il; cc"6cp-ibn er.rEnti, riigr.r iourr for the State of Telan_gana. [oUT] 9. o;; ccld G snnnvYA REDbY-PATLLoLA, Advoqate [oPUC] io.Oii" CC io Snt T.SnEEDHAR REDDY, Advocale-(OPUC) ii:6;; ca i; sRi Snrr.rrvns RAo PACHWA, sc FoR GHMC' Advocate 12.Iwo CD Copies Court for the State of Telangana [OUT] TGSPDCL, HYderabad. (oPUC) SA LS 4y ::'---,.\ 2 Ir ,iFP z[fr 1-,1 \'\ HIGH COURT DATED:0710812025 ORDER WP.No.23321 of 2025 DISPOSING OF THE W.P WITHOUT COSTS. b \ q q 4r. L'/