A dispute over property title or pending partition suits does not preclude the grant of a new electricity service connection to an occupant, provided outstanding arrears are settled, as such grant does not affect the legal determination of ownership.

JUDGMENT:

Learned counsel Sri Rapolu Bhaskar appears for the appellant.

Learned counsel Sri K.Sai Sri Harsha appears for respondent No.1.

Sri P.Ganesh, learned Government Pleader for Energy Department, appears for respondent No.2.

Sri A.Chandra Shaker, learned Standing Counsel for Northern Power Distribution Company of Telangana Limited (TGNPDCL), appears for respondents No.3 and 4.

2. The present writ appeal is filed by the appellant, who is respondent No.4 in W.P.No.17369 of 2025, against the judgment passed by the learned writ court dated 24.02.2026 allowing the said writ petition.

3. The writ petition was filed by respondent No.1 for a declaration that the proceedings dated 29.04.2025 issued by respondent No.3 herein rejecting his application for new electricity service connection to his house bearing No.2-22, were illegal, arbitrary and violative of principles of natural justice. He also prayed for grant of provisional service connection. The learned writ court allowed the writ petition and quashed the proceedings impugned thereunder and directed that new electricity service connection be issued to respondent No.1 upon realization of usual charges and arrears of Rs.22,833/- for the service connection bearing No.24-12-00542 within four weeks. Thereafter, the arrears and dues have been paid and the electricity service connection has been restored as per the submission of the learned Standing Counsel for TGNPDCL.

4. The writ appeal has been filed by the appellant on the ground that the learned writ court did not appreciate the ownership dispute and had erred in granting the relief, despite pendency of the suit concerning title and partition. Respondent No.1 failed to establish the lawful title or entitlement to seek the electricity service connection and that the earlier writ proceedings resulted in lawful disconnection. Arrears cannot be insisted upon contrary to the statutory provisions governing recovery of dues. The impugned judgment amounts to adjudicating the disputed questions of title which should have been left to the civil court. Therefore, the learned writ court committed an error of jurisdiction in passing the impugned judgment under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

5. The relevant background facts leading to the instant litigation are as under:

Respondent No.1 claims to have purchased an open plot and later constructed a house bearing No.2-22 and obtained electricity service connection No.62915-00081 in the name of Nalla Sahajeevan Reddy on 24.05.1982. Thereafter, O.S.No.22 of 2022 and O.S.No.156 of 2023 were filed concerning the property disputes and partition. Respondent No.1 had obtained temporary injunction by order dated 15.12.2023 passed in I.A.No.420 of 2023 in O.S.No.156 of 2023. Thereafter, the electricity service connection of respondent No.1 was disconnected pursuant to a direction passed in W.P.No.32156 of 2024 at the instance of the appellant. Respondent No.1 has applied to the official respondents for new electricity service connection. The proceedings rejecting the new electricity service connection was passed on 29.04.2025 on the ground that there were outstanding arrears in respect of the service connection Nos.62915-00081 and 62915-00758 which were installed in the subject premises. Respondent No.3 stated that the subject premises already has service connections in the name of Nalla Sahajeevan Reddy and Nalla Subadra - parents of the appellant, and refused to grant a new connection without clearance of d