Occupiers have a statutory right to electricity supply regardless of the landlord's disputes, which must be resolved in appropriate civil venues.

ORDER :

Heard Sri B.Nalin Kumar, learned senior designated counsel representing Sri Srinivas Chamarthy, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner on record, Sri N.Sreedhar Reddy, learned standing counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent Nos. 1 to 3 and Sri More Shashi Kiran learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent No.4

2. The petitioner approached the Court seeking prayer as under:

“.........to issue a Writ of Mandamus or other appropriate order or direction in the nature of a Writ declaring that the action of the respondents 1 to 3 in releasing and continuing the electricity supply to 4^th respondent under SC No. 1013814 as arbitrary discriminatory and without any legal authority and violative of Article 14 of Constitution of India and contrary to the terms and condition of supply of power and consequently direct them to disconnect the electricity to the Service Connection bearing SC No.1013814 in the interest of justice........”

3. The case of the petitioner, in brief, as per the averments made by the petitioner in the affidavit filed by the petitioner in support of the present w rit petition, is as under:

The petitioner is the Secretary of petitioner waqf and the Waqf has certain properties at Lakdikapool, Hyderabad i.e., properties bearing house nos.6-1-1081, 6-1-1081/1, 6-1-1082/1 to 12. It is the specific case of the petitioner that the respondent No.4 is not a duly inducted tenant in the subject properties owned by the petitioner waqf at Lakdikapool, Hyderabad, however, he had been illegally inducted into the subject property in connivance with Mr. Masiuddin Kabeer and one Mr. Khusru Ali Baig who falsely claimed to be the Secretary of the petitioner waqf. The 4^th respondent having illegally entered into the possession of the subject property applied for the electricity connection and was granted service connection bearing SC.No.B.1013814 and the petitioner submitted a representation, dated 17.11.2014 requesting for disconnection of the said service connection and when there was inaction on the part of the official respondents herein, petitioner made again another representation, dated 24.11.2014 and in response to the said representation, the 3^rd respondent called upon the 4^th respondent to submit the relevant documents i.e., no objection certificate, payment of balance cc charges of Rs.3046/- and valid rental agreement within three days from the date of receipt of the said notice. The 3^rd respondent again issued another reminder letter dated 26.11.2014 to the 4^th respondent calling upon the 4^th respondent to produce the relevant documents and when the 4^th respondent failed to submit any documents the petitioner herein issued another representation, dated 03.12.2014 requesting the 3^rd respondent to disconnect the electricity service connection of the 4^th respondent herein.

It is further the case of the petitioner that the 3^rd respondent instead of disconnecting the electricity supply of the 4^th respondent under SC No.1013814 issued the proceedings, dated 12.12.2014 intimating the petitioner herein that as per instructions of their standing legal advisor of TSSPDCL, the petitioner is requested to approach competent Court to obtain direction for disconnection of electricity supply for the SC No.1013814 under the 4^th respondent herein. Aggrieved by the action of the respondent Nos.1 to 3 in releasing and continuing the electricity supply to the 4^th respondent under SC No.1013814 as arbitrary and contrary to the terms and conditions of supply of power, the petitioner approached the Court by filing the present Writ Petition.

4. PERUSED THE RECO