Back
2024 Supreme(Online)(TEL) 23216
HIGH COURT OF TELANGANA
SUREPALLI NANDA, J
Lagishetty Bhaskar – Appellant
Versus
T. S. S. P. D. C. L Operation – Respondent
WP/17209/2024
The distribution licensee has a statutory duty to supply electricity to the rightful owner or occupier of the premises as per the Electricity Act, 2003.
Headnote:(A) Electricity Act, 2003 - Section 43 - Writ of Mandamus - Petition filed by the owner of agricultural land to remove unauthorized electrical installations by respondents - The court found no merit in the petitioner's claims as the electricity connection was legally established since 1997 - The court emphasized the statutory duty of the distribution licensee to provide electricity to the rightful owner or occupier. (Paras 7, 11)
(B) Legal Principles - The court affirmed that electricity is a basic amenity and cannot be denied to a tenant based on the landlord's refusal to issue a no objection certificate. (Paras 10, 11)
Facts of the case:
The petitioner claimed ownership of agricultural land where unauthorized electrical installations were made by respondents, seeking their removal through a writ petition.
Findings of Court:
The court dismissed the writ petition, allowing the petitioner to seek remedies against the other respondents while noting the legality of the existing electricity connection.
Issues: The core issue was whether the petitioner had the right to demand removal of the electrical installations based on ownership claims.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the distribution licensee has a statutory duty to supply electricity to the rightful owner or occupier of the premises, as established by the Electricity Act, 2003.
Result: Writ petition dismissed.
ORDER:
Hear d Sr i Kalu v ala Ven k at a Var a Pr asad, lear n ed cou n sel for t h e pet it ion er , lear n ed Assist an t Gover n m en t Pleader for En er gy, appear in g on beh alf of r espon den t No.8 , Sr i R. Vin od Reddy, lear n ed St an din g Cou n sel for TSSPDCL, appear in g on beh alf of r espon den t Nos. 1 t o 5 an d Sr i Y. Sr ih ar i, lear n ed cou n sel appear in g on beh alf of r espon den t Nos. 6 an d 7 .
2 .Th e pet it ion er appr oach ed t h e Cou r t seek in g pr ay er as u n der :
“ … to issue any appropriate order or orders or writ more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents 1 to 5 in not disconnecting the power connection not removing the electrical pole Iron Fuse Box in the petitioners agricultural land situated in Sy.No. 213 to an extent of Ac.0.39 guntas situated at Laxmapoor Village, Muuduchinthalapally Mandal, Medchal- Malkajgiri District in terms of representation dated 15.12.2023 of the petitioner is illegal, arbitrary and violative of principles of natural justice and consequently direct the respondents 1 to 5 to take appropriate action in terms of the petitioner’s representation dated 15.12.2023 in the interest of Justice and pass… ”. 3 .
The case of the petitioner in brief is that the petitoner is the absolute owner and possessor of agricultural land to an extent of Ac.0.39 guntas in Sy.No. 213 situated at Laxmapoor village, Muuduchinthalapally Mandal, Medchal Malkajgiri District. The respondent Nos.6 and 7 in collusion with the brother of the petitioner have erected electrical pole and obtained power connection on their names with respect to the petitioner’s property and are trying to take possession of the petitioner’s property. The respondent No.6 had erected the electrical pole, iron fuse box and obtained power connection in the property of the petitioner. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner made a representation dated 15.12.2023 to the official respondents requesting the respondents to remove the electrical pole, but the same was not considered. Hence, the writ petition.
4 .It is the specific case of the petitioner that in spite of petitioner’s representation dated 15.12.2023 no action has been initiated for disconnection of electricity connection and removal of electrical pole erected in the said land by 6 th respondent herein.
5 . Cou n t er affidav it h as been filed by t h e r espon den t Nos. 1 t o 5 an d t h e r elevan t par a Nos.2 an d 3 ar e ex t r act ed h er eu n der :
“ 2 . It is submitted that after receiving the notice in the Writ petition t h e r espon den t s h av e visit ed t h e sit e, an d on e Mr . L. Kr ish n a Mu r t h y w as pr esen t at t h e sit e an d h e h as in for m ed t h at h e h as obt ain ed agr icu lt u r e ser vice con n ect ion bear in g Sc. No. 0 1 2 6 0 0 3 9 4 an d t h e sam e is located in the said land. On further inspection there is no iron fuse box in the land. There is only one cement pole and from the said pole the power supply is provided to the above referred service connection. On ver ificat ion of t h e r ecor ds, it r ev ealed t h at t h e ser vice con n ect ion w as r eleased in t h e y ear 1 9 9 7 .
3 . I t is su bm it t ed t h at t h e L. Kr ish n a Mu r t h y h as also su bm it t ed a Xer ox copy of t h e pat t adar passbook an d h e h as fu r t h er in for m ed t h at h e is t h e ow n er of Sy. No. 2 1 3 adm easu r in g Ac 1 .3 7 gt s an d t h at t h e agr icu lt u r e ser vice connection is located in the land and the power supply is being used for agriculture pumpset and agriculture activity is being carried in the said land. Th e said per son h as also fu r n ish ed a copy of t h e APSEB passbook w h ich w as issu ed ear lier t o Agr icu lt u r e cat egor y con su m er s an d as per t h e said passbook t h e ser vice con n ect ion w as r eleased on , 0 5 .0 2 .1 9 9 7 . 6 . Sri R. Vinod Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for TSSPDCL
