Telangana High Court
Ganta Nageshwara Rao, vs The State Of Telangana, Rep. By Its ... on 14 November, 2024
Author: Surepalli Nanda
Bench: Surepalli Nanda
HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE SUREPALLI NANDA
WRIT PETITION No.15469 OF 2016
ORDER:
Heard Sri Tangeda Dayanandarao, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, learned Government Pleader for Energy, appearing on behalf of the respondent No.1 and Sri Zakir Ali Danish, learned Standing Counsel for TSNPDCL, appearing on behalf of respondent Nos.2 to 5.
2. The petitioner approached the Court seeking prayer as under:
"...to issue a Writ or Order or Direction particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the inaction on the part of the Respondents in considering and taking appropriate action in removing the Electrical Poles and the Transformer existing in Plot Nos.4, 11, 18 and 27 in Sy.No. 711, situated Teachers' Colony, Paloncha, Khammam District (DTR and HT/LT Line at Teachers' Colony, Paloncha) in pursuance of the Representations dated 19-06-2015 and 08- 02-2016, as arbitrary, illegal and violative Articles 14, 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the Respondents 2 to 4 to remove the electric poles and Transformer existing in Plot Nos.4, 11, 18 and 27 in Sy.No. 711, situated Teachers' Colony, Paloncha, Khammam District (DTR and HT/LT Line at Teachers' Colony, Paloncha), in the interest of justice and pass such other order or orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case."
SN, J 2 WP_15469_2016
3. The case of the petitioner, in brief, is that the petitioner is the absolute owner and possessor of plot Nos.4, 11, 18, and 27, admeasuring 1936 Sq. yards in Sy.No.711, Paloncha Municipality, Khammam District, and the Respondents had laid Electrical Poles and a transformer in petitioner's subject land and inspite of petitioner's repeated requests the respondent authorities have not removed the electricity poles and a transformer from the petitioner's land. Aggrieved by the same, the present writ petition is filed.
4. Perused the record.
5. The counter affidavit has been field on behalf of the respondent No.3 and in particular, paragraph Nos.7 and 8 are extracted hereunder:
"7. It is further submitted that, the existing HT/LT Lines and 3 phase DTR were shifted and work has been completed on 23.05.2016, from the consumer/petitioner premises to the boundary of R & B road and at present there are no HT/LT Lines and 3 phase DTR existing in the consumer premises. The old plinth of DTR was also demolished.
8. It is further submitted that, from the above stated facts it thus clear that the grievance of the petitioner's has been resolved by shifting the poles and the transformer, as such there is no merit in the writ petition and the same is liable to be dismissed."
SN, J 3 WP_15469_2016
6. Sri Zakir Ali Danish, learned Standing Counsel for TSNPDCL, appearing on behalf of the respondent Nos.2 to 5 placing reliance on the averments made at paragraph Nos.7 and 8 in the counter affidavit filed on behalf of respondent No.3, submits that the grievance of the petitioner had been resolved by shifting the poles and the transformer and therefore, there is no merit in the present writ petition.
7. Taking into consideration the averments made at paragraph Nos.7 and 8 in the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the respondent No.3 and in view of the fact that the grievance of the petitioner had already been addressed by the respondents and the subject issue had been resolved by shifting the poles and the transformer from petitioner's subject land, the writ petition stands closed. However, there shall be no order as to costs.
As a sequel, the miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in the Writ Petition shall also stand closed.
___________________________ MRS. JUSTICE SUREPALLI NANDA Date: 14.11.2024 Lpd