Mohd Noor Uddin Abid v. The State of Telangana, ReP

Petition under Article 226 of lhe Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith' the High Court may be pleased to issue a writ, order or direction more partrcularly issue a writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents 2 to 4 in not releasing power supply for 1B Nos. 3-ph. D/s each 5 KW alongwith existing 1 No 3-Ph cat-B SC 1) R3012040 7KW makrng a total load of 97 KW by providing new 100 KVA to the petitioner property bearing M No 22-1-709 ' 22-1-715 and 22-1-716 lotally admeasuring 1333 sq.yds situated at Noorkhan bazar' Hyderabad as arbitrary' illegal and without the authority of law and consequently direct the respondent 2 3 to 4 to release the power supply without insisting for occullancy certificate from the petitioner IA NO: 1 0F 2025 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition' the High Cotrrt may be pleased to pleased to direct the responden I 2 lo 4 to supply electr icrty to the premises bearing M.No.22-1-709 ,22'1-715 and 22-1-716 totally adm-'asuring 1333 sq yds' bazar, Hyderabad pending disposal of the above writ situated at Noorkhan petition. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI MAZHER ALI KHAN Counsel for the Respondent No'1: GP FOR ENERGY Counsel for the Respondent No'2 to 4: SRI N'SREEDHAR REDDY' SC FOR TGSPDCL Counsel for the Respondent No'5: SRI R'VENKATESH' SC: FOR GHMC The Court made the following: ORDER HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NAGESH BHEEMAPAKA IIIRIT PETITION No. 24282 OF 2025 ORDER: In this Writ Petition, a direction is sought to Respondents - TGSPDCL to provide electricity connection to the petitioner property bearing M.No.22- I-7O9, 22-l-7 lS and 22-l- 7 16, totally admeasuring 1 333 square yards situated at Noorkhan Bazar, Hyderabad without insisting on production of 'occupancy certificate' from Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation.

2. Petitioner claims to be the absolute owner and possessor of subject property. It is stated, they constructed stiit + three upper floors according to the approved sanctioned plan. They have also paid atl the requisite fee / charges /challans to the respondents for electricity connection and the same was also sanctioned on 17.O7.2025. Btrt respondents did not release power supply on the ground that 'occupancy certificate' was not submitted, which condition, according to petitioner, is not a mandatory. Hence, the Writ Petition. 2 I.WBK,J \\'P 24282 2025 3 Hearcl Mr Mazher A1i Khan, learned counsel for petitioner, Iearned Government Pleader lor Bnerry for respondent No.1 and Sri N.Sreedhar Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for TGSPDCL for respondent Nos.2 to 4. Perused the record

4. Learned counsel for petitioner contends that this Court in several Writ Petitions directed respondents to release power supply to the premises of petitioner therein subject to compliance q,ith the terms and conditions and on furnishing an undertaking to produce the occupancy certificate from the Municipal Corporation concerned within a prescribed period and if no such occupancy certificate 1S produced within the stipulated period, it is open to respondents to take lrppropriate action in accordance u,ith lar,r,. Hence, similar order may be passed even in this Writ Petition also. 5 Sri N. Sreedhar Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for TGSPDCL submits that based on the above order, the authorities have been releasing power supply. u,ithout insisting on production of occupancy certificate and on the ASSt TAl1CC given by the parties that they would furnish the said certificate at a later date, however, they are not tunring up w'ith the :*ruI ;;-/-il -/ // / J NBK,] wP 21282 2025 certificates at all and enjoying the power supply. Hence, learned Standing Counsel prays to take the said aspect into consideration.

6. Evidently, TGSPDCL in their letter dated 17.07.2025 addressed to petitioner specifically mentioned that 'no seruice connection shall be released for multi-stoied buildings / comp.l.exes greater than 1O meters in height unless occupancg certificate from the authorities concemed is produced'. The Corporation also grarted building permit dated 19.03.2019 subject to the conditions that public amenities such as water supply, electricity connections will be provided only production of occupancy certilicate. Petitioner, however, without questioning the said condition, cannot seek indulgence of this Court now

7. Though learned counsel for petitioner places strong reliance on various orders, with great respect, this Court inclines to take a slight departure, for, several buildings are mushrooming after getting approval for a particular plan, thereafter giving a go-by, additional floors a-re being raised unscrupulously and the parties are applying for building regularisation scheme for legatising the said unauthorised 4 NBK,J \m 24262 202s structures and the civic body is not abie to touch these structures. This Court cannot be a mute spectator for such unceremonious procedure and does not want to encourage this type of activitv in the interest of society at large

8. The above-said opinion of this Court is justihed by the recent judgment in Rajendra Kumar Barjatga a. U.P. Aaos Euam Vikas Parishadl wherein, the Honble Supreme Court in the larger plrblic interest, issued directions in addition to the directives issued in Re: Directions in the motter of demolition of stnrctures. Relevalt for the purpose of this case art: (iv) A11 the necessary service connections, such as, Electricity, water supp1,rr. serverage connection, etc., shall be given by the servlce provider / Board to the buildings on[,u- after the production of the completion / occupation certificate. (v) Even afte r issuance of completion certificate, deviation / violation if any contrarv to the planning permission brought to the notice of the authorit5r immediate steps be taken by the said authority concerned, in accordance with law, against the builder / owner / occupant; and the ofhcial, who is responsible for t 2024 SCC Onlirc SC 1767 .M Y7/"v' /II ) NBK,J wP 24282 2025 issualce of wrongful completion / occupation certificate shall be proceeded departmentally forthwith. (vi) No permission / licence to conduct any business / trade must be given by any authorities including local bodies of States /Union Territories in any unauthorised building irrespective of it being residential or commercial building. (vii) The development must be in conformity with the zonal plar, land usage. Any modification to such zona-l plan and usage must be taken by strictly follo',ving the rules in place land in consideration of the larger public interest and the impact on the environment ( (

9. In view of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court making production of occupancy certificate / completion certificate as condition precedent for releasing porver supply ald also in view of the rampant misuse of the liberty granted by this Court to the parties on several occasions, with regard to non- insistence of Occupancy Certificate, this Court takes serious note of the situation.

10. Therefore, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing petitioner to approach the municipal authorities concerned hrst \e!{HY - \ 6 NBK.J wP_24l8l 2025 for issuance of occupancy certificate. On producing such certificate only, respondent - TGSPDCL shall consider the case of petitioner for release of electricity connection, in accordance with law. No costs. 11 Miscellaneous Appiications, if any shall stand closed //TRUE COPY// I- SI SRINIVASA REDDY STANT REGISTRAR ', SECTION OFFICER

1. The Principal Secretary, Energy Depa(ment Secretarrat Hyderabad, State of Telangana.

2. The Chairman and Managing Director, Telangana Southern Power Distribution Corporation Ltd, Mint Compound, Hyderabad

3. The Superintendent Engineer, Operations, Hyderabad-South Circle, Telangana State Southern Power Distribution Corporation Ltd

4. The Asst. Divisional Engineer, Operations/Asmangad h Divisron, Hyderabad- South Circle Telangana State Southern Power Distribution Corporation Ltd 5. The Dy. Commissioner, Malakpet, Hyderabad Circle No.6. Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation.

6. One CC to SRI N,4AZHER ALI KHAN, Advocate [OPUC] 7. One CC to SRI N SREEDHAR REDDY, SC FOR TGSPDCL [OPUC] 8. One CC to SRI R VENKATESH, SC FOR GHMC [OPUCj 9. Two CCs to GP FOR ENERGY, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad [OUT] To, i I

10.Two CD Copies BSR BS { r HIGH COURT DATED: 1810812025 i I I I I ORDER WP.No.24282 ot 2025 .:'11,r'i-a ...<, 14 Irc 2 I AU8 2025 i..., DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION, WITHOUT COSTS ?a-