SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(Tel) 37659

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
Nagesh Bheemapaka, J
Arqam Industries – Appellant
Versus
Telangana State Southern Power Distribution Company Limited – Respondent
WRIT PETITION No. 4404 OF 2024



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: K.S. Suneel
For the Respondents: N. Sreedhar Reddy, Peri Prabhakar

A writ of mandamus for the provision of essential utility services, such as electricity, will not be granted for a property that is subject to ongoing land title disputes, encroachment allegations, and pending demolition orders arising from unauthorized construction or violations of zonal planning laws.

Headnote:(A) Telangana Panchayat Raj Act, 2018 - Section 144 - G.O. Ms. No. 67 of the Panchayat Raj Department dated 26.02.2002 - Electricity connection for industrial premises - Requirement of lawful possession and valid building permissions - Where construction of a structure is subject to demolition orders due to illegal encroachment and deviation from sanctioned plans, a writ of mandamus for supply of electricity cannot be granted as the structure is not treated as lawful for the purpose of service connection. (Paras 6, 8)

(B) Writ Jurisdiction - Scope - The court will not adjudicate disputed questions of title, ownership, and boundaries in writ proceedings as these are matters to be determined by the competent civil court. (Paras 3, 5, 8)

(C) Administrative Law - Duty of service providers - Following Supreme Court directives - Service connections including electricity shall be provided only upon production of completion / occupation certificate; no trade or business license to be granted for unauthorized or illegal buildings. (Para 9)

Facts of the case:
The petitioners sought the intervention of the High Court to direct the electricity department to provide a power supply for a rice mill. The 8th respondent opposed this on the grounds of encroachment and illegal construction, citing multiple proceedings and demolition notices issued by the local authorities, and indicated that the petitioners had already alienated the subject property to third parties.

Findings of Court:
The court observed that the industrial application process pre-supposes lawful possession and valid building permission. Given the existing demolition orders and active disputes over land title and encroachment, the authorities correctly withheld the power supply until the competent planning authority resolves the matter. The court further noted that the writ petition was effectively infructuous due to the alienation of the property.

Issues: Whether the petitioners are entitled to a writ of mandamus for electricity supply despite allegations of encroachment and pending demolition orders, and whether the writ court should adjudicate on the title disputes.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that judicial mandates for service connections cannot be issued for structures that lack valid occupation certificates or are under demolition orders for zoning violations, and that complex title disputes involving encroachment fall outside the purview of writ jurisdiction.

Result: Writ Petition dismissed.

Table of Content
1. summary of conflicting claims regarding entitlement to electricity and property status. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4)
2. principle that utility services depend on lawful ownership and clear building permissions. (Para 5 , 6 , 8)
3. issue of maintainability due to transfer of property interest. (Para 7)
4. applicability of supreme court precedents on utility connections to unauthorized structures. (Para 9 , 10 , 11 , 12)

O R D E R:

Petitioners claim to be the owners and possessors of agricultural land in Survey Nos. 67/2 and 67/3 to an extent of Ac.0-22 guntas at Tummanpally Village, Jharasangam Mandal, Sangareddy District. Subsequently, the said lands were converted into non-agricultural lands by the competent authority vide Proceedings dated 20.07.2023. With an intention to establish a Rice Mill on the aforesaid land, they submitted an Application to the 2nd Respondent, who vide Proceedings dated 04.10.2023, granted permission for the construction of the Rice Mill over the said converted lands. It is stated, to extend the proposed Rice Mill construction, they purchased adjacent lands in Survey No.67/3/4 admeasuring Ac.0-12. guntas and also Ac.0.09 guntas in Survey No.67/5/4/2 which were also converted from agricultural to non-agricultural use vide Proceedings dated 02.11.2023 and 09.11.2023 respectively. Thereafter, Petitioners are stated to have submitted a Common Application Form seeking permission for building construction and simultaneously sought permission for power supply through the TS-iPass on line system.

1.1. Under the influence of Respondent No.8, the District Town and Country Planning Officer issued a Show Cause Notice dated 16.11.2023, alleging that Petitioners encroached upon the land belonging to Respondent No.8 and was undertaking construction in violation of building rules. Petitioners are stated to have submitted detailed reply on 22.11.2023, denying all the allegations contained in the said Show Cause Notice. Petitioner submitted F-Line Application dated 20.11.2023 seeking to conduct survey and demarcation of their lands, pursuant to which, the Mandal Surveyor scheduled survey of Survey No.67 on 15.12.2023, however, Respondent No.8 failed to appear at the site; so also to another notice.

1.2. While so, when Panchayat Raj Officials were interfering with their construction activities, Petitioners filed Writ Petition No. 33852 of 2023, wherein this Court, vide order dated 14.12.2023, directed Respondents not to interfere with construction activities being carried out by Petitioners over the property. Subsequently, Respondent No.8 again lodged a complaint dated 24.01.2024 only to harass and obstruct Petitioners' legitimate business operations. According to petitioners, official Respondents, being statutory authorities, are duty-bound to consider and process the on line TS-iPass Common Application Form dated 04.11.2023 for power supply to the Rice Mill. The deliberate inaction is illegal and arbitrary.

1.3. Petitioners further contend that the official Respondents have no authority or jurisdiction to adjudicate issues relating to title or ownership over the subject property, as those are matters for the competent civil court to decide. Refusal to process the Application on account of alleged title disputes amounts to an excess of jurisdiction. Hence, the Writ Petition.

2. The 5th Respondent - Assistant Divisional Engineer (Operations), Telangana State Southern Power Distribution Company Limited (TSSPDCL), stating that Petitioner's Application for power supply was duly received, processed, and accepted by them; after verification, they sanctioned power supply estimate vide Estimate No.E-2023-90-04-12-01-022. Pursuant to the said sanction, required payments were made through two separate Demand Drafts dated 09.11.2023 for Rs.4,75,120/- and another dated 09.11.2023 for Rs.35,990/-. Upon such payment, necessary departmental work pertaining to the said power supply connection was initiated; work has been compl

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top