HON’BLE MRS JUSTI CE SUREPALLI NANDA WRI T PETI TI ON No.8984 OF 2024

ORDER:

Heard Mr. Tarun G. Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.R. Vinod Reddy, learned Standing counsel for respondent Nos.1 and 2.

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

“ … to issue a direction or order or Writ more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 in unlawfully and illegally interfering with the ownership and possession of the petitioner’s property admeasuring Ac.1-14 Gts in Sy. Nos. 330/1, 331/1, 331/2, situated at Shaikpet Village and Mandal, Hyderabad District, Telangana State, including by seeking to erect and install a power transformer on the petitioner’s property without issuing any notice and without following the procedure prescribed in law as arbitrary illegal and unconstitutional, apart from being in violation of principles of natural justice and in contravention of the law laid down by the Honourable Supreme Court and in contravention of the Electricity Act 2003 and the rules made thereunder and set aside such action and consequently direct the Respondents No.1 and 2 not to interfere with the petitioner’s property admeasuring Ac.1-14 Gts in Sy. Nos.330/1, 331/1 331/2 situated at Shaikpet Village and Mandal Hyderabad District, Telangana State in any manner whatsoever including by restraining the Respondents from erecting and installing a power transformer on the petitioner’s property and pass ...”

3. It is the specific case of the petitioner that the petitioner is the absolute owner and possessor of land admeasuring Ac.1-14 guntas in Sy.Nos. 330/1, 331/1, 331/2 situated at Shaikpet village and Mandal, Hyderabad District. On 01.04.2024 the respondent No.1 and 2 erected a transformer in the land of the petitioner without following due process of law. On 02.04.2024 the petitioner submitted a representation to the respondent No.1 but the same was not considered. On 03.04.2024 respondent Nos.1 and 2 illegally blocked the northern access gate of the petitioner for erection of transformer. Hence the writ petition.

4. This Court on 04.04.2024 passed interim order observing as under:

“This matter is taken up by way of lunch motion. Questioning the action of respondent Nos.1 and

2 in unlawfully and illegally interfering with the ownership and possession of the petitioner’s property including by seeking to erect and install a power transformer on the petitioner’s property without issuing notice and without following due procedure, this writ petition is filed.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that copy of the writ petition has been served on learned standing counsel for respondent Nos.1 and 2.

As per the photographs filed by the petitioner, it can be seen that respondent authorities are erecting transformer right in front of the petitioner’s property gate. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that earlier a representation was given to the respondent authorities on 02.04.2024 stating that on 01.04.2024 at about 04.00 P.M., officials of the respondent Board had entered the petitioner’s land and sought to undertake civil works in front of the access gate situated at north side of the said land. It is also submitted that the petitioner has acquired the said property by virtue of a compromise decree dated 08.10.2010 passed in O.S.No.135 of 2006 on the file of XI Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court at Hyderabad.

The main grievance of the petitioner is that action of the official respondents is without issuing any notice and without taking prior consent of the owner of the property, which is in gross violation of Works of Licenses Rules, 2006. Learned counsel has drawn attention to Rule 3 of Works of Licenses Rules, 2006, which is extracted hereunder:

“ 3.Licensee to carry out w orks:

(1) A licensee may-

(a)carry out works, lay down or place any electric supply line or other works in, through, or against, any building, or on, over or under any land