The High Court · 2025

The Assistant Divisional Engineer ( Operations) TGSpDCL, Kodada Substation and Office Koda'da fown dnO fVinJbt, SJry"p"t Oi.tri"t, The Assistant Engineer ( Operations), TGSpDCL., Kodada Substation and Office Kodada tolwn and M'andal, Srirya;et Dr:st;;, Pusapati Rama Rao, S/o. Late Guravaiah, Aged about 45 years, Occ. Business, R7o. Naya Nagar, Kodada rown aio ttli-noar, sJryiptt orsirrct, '-" ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Articre 226 0f the constitution of rndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction more particurarry one in the nature of writ of frrlandamus declaring the action of the 5th Respondent herein in disconnecting the Service connection No. 4240124464/cat-r on 05-09- 2025 which was given in respect of rand in Sy.No.500/1 and 501/3 to an extent of Ac.1.00 Gts., situated at Khammam X Road Kodad Revenue Viflage and rown, SURYAPET District by ignoring the order passed by the 4th Respondent herein It vide his memo .No.ADE/ Operation/ Kodadi F. No. D . No ;80 i 25dated.28-07- 2025 is illegal and violative of prrncipals of natural justi e and also violative Art.19 and 2'1 of the constitution of lndia. lA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under Sectron 151 CPC praying that in the ;ircumstances staterl in the affidavit filecl in support of the petition, the High Co - 1 may be pleased to direct the 5th Respondent herein to restore the petitioners Service Connection No. 42401244641Cat-l immediately which was given espect of land in Sy.No.500/ 1 & 501/ 3 to an extent of Ac 1.00 Gts , sitr I ted at Khammam X Road Kodad Revenue Village & Town, Suryapet Distri., pending the final disposal of the main Writ Petition. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI J. SURESH BABU Counsel for the Respondent No.1: GP FOR ENERGY Counsel for the Respondent Nos.2 to 5: SRI N. SREEDHAtt REDDy, SC FOR TGSPDCT Counsel for the Respondent No.6: SRI C. HARI PREETH The Court made the following: ORDER -.-"-!ffi !'-'--Ff THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NAGESH BHEEMAPAKA WRIT PETITION No.28OO1 of 2025 ORDER: This Wrrt Petition is filecl challenging the action of rhe 5til respondent disconnecting Service Connection No 4240124161 /Cat I on 05.09.2025, pertaining to land in S,i,.Nos 5OO/ 1 and 50 1/3 to an extent ol Ac. 1.00 gts., situatcd art Khammam X Road. Kodad Revenue Village and Town, Suryapet District, br ignoring the order passed by the 4'h respondent uide Memo dated

28.O7.2025, is illegal alid arbitrarl'

2. Heard Mr. .J. Suresh Babu, learned counsel .for the petitioner, Sri N. Sreedhar Reddy, Iearned Standing Counsei for TGSPDCL for respondent Nos.2 to 5, and Sri C.Hari Preeth, learned counsei for respondent No. 6. Perused the record.

3. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that her husband, Late Vemireddy Govinda Reddy, purchased land to an extent of Ac.1.O0 gts. in Sy.Nos. 500/1 and 501/3 at Kodad and subsequently executed a registered Gift Deed uide Document No.1394/ 1993, dated

05.07.1993, in lavour of his minor daughter, Vemireddl, Mounika, for her welfare after her mother's death. After Mounika attained majority, t she dicd on 2E.Of.l.2(liC, maliing Govinda Red<lr' rer sole leg:rl heir and ilbsolute ou'ncr o[ the propert''. Responrletrt lrl. 6, in collusiolr u,ith Mounil:a's rratcrnal qr:rndlatl,er, allcgr: ll fabricated arl Agreement of Salc clzrted 08.05.2010 b-r- forgirrg l\,,.,,;l'r<a's sigrtaLltr.,: with an intention to grab the propertr'. Th c suit for specific performance, 0. S . No.3 of 20 1 1 , liled b,v Respc r clent No. 6, \\''as dismissed on 20.09.2019, holdir-rg that the allegecl .greement was no'r proved alcl appeared to be a created documt:nt. I r.rring this period, Govrnda Reddr' lar.r'fr-rlh' obtaincd clectricitv Sen,, c Conncction No 4240124464 lCat I for the said land, and ali: his death, the connection continued ln petitioner's narr] e as his legal heir Respondent No.6 repeatedly sought disconnection ri the service, but the 4.th respondent rc' jccted his reqr-rest after clut-' (' rquin', reaffirming on 28.O7.2025 that the scrvice !r-as validll .ssued and that Respondent No.6 had no legal title. Despite this, L re 5rh respondent, allegediy under political pressllle and rvithot r issuing notice, disconnected the scrvice on 05.O9.2025. Hence, thi : Writ Petition.

4. Learned Standing Counsel for TGSPDCL subr rits that there are disputes between petitioner and 6,h respondent reg: iding the properb' in question. It is stated that petitioner has raisr < severai disputeci questions of fact, ir-rcluding allegations that the A1y t ement ol' Sale is a w 3 fabricated document. It is further stated that the pou'er connection to petitioner rvas disconnected based on repeated representations made by the 6,1, rcspondent, and r-t1ton knou'ing that the disconnection 'nvas lvithout authoritv of lar.r', the 4'h rcspondent directed the 5'h respondent to restore the pos er supply immediatelY, which r"'as accordingl,',' restored. Thercfore, it is contended that no case is made out by'petitioner, and the u'rit petition is devoid of merits ald liable to I \ be dismissed.

5. Having considered rhe submissions and perused the record, this Court is of the vie'"r' that the 4rh respondent, vlde order dated

28.O7 .2025, concluded tl'rat petitioner's service connection was validll' sanctioned, rthich remains unchallenged. The subsequent disconnection bv the ('h respondent on O5.09.2025, without notice, lvas arbitrary. Hor'r,ever, it is to be noted that the 4th respondent has directed the 5,h respondent to restore the power supply to the petitioner and accordingh', the porver supply was restored. Since the titie dispute betrn'een the petitioner and Respondent No.6 is pending, Respondent No.6 may approach the competent civil court for adjudication. \\ w\''h,\ 4

6. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is dispos':1 ol direcling the respondents to cnsure that thc service connecl-i( r rclttains restored There shall be no order as to costs Pendinp, nriscellar-reon s applications, i[ , i r,i , sl-ra]l stand closed ' 1 ;, 3#N','A:t'3FRRX l /t-- t._- /TTRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To, ;***.T-u--ts-*-{ ,,l-*ri;;,,. iid$:,',"'l*{ijl,'""?fl ft3s,i,",#,,r,"xil.}i3ltii.{ffil?j,."".", 5. The Assistant Engineer " . ofi#"Kil;oi ro"*n and tvlandal' q"v'-P"lP::tpl' : . 3l5 E3 13 .'i''*'J'*"# i'iiH +!BT:F"b:! IiE .'' c' to P u c l 8 Two CCs to GP t"' tn*Erl}tti-clitt'ro1ln" State ' r Telangana at r BI1"8t?S t?%nn,,., Preeth' AdvocateloPUCl

10. Two CD CoPies TJ 'tuy l I : 1l I I I I HIGH COURT DATED:1 111112025 ORDER WP.No.28001 of 2025 $" gF TE <1 .c -.$s ) I I i t lr- i \ iH+ DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS I .,,, \/ I f-.- 9 o ?'t nr(, ( ( a, ) I I I