M/S Rollon Container, Hyd v. Central Power Disbn Co. Ltd., Hyd
This judgment came from a scanned document and its text layer is unreliable — words may be garbled. Check the original PDF before relying on any passage.
I [ 3300 ] HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE TWENTY NINTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NAGESH BHEEMAPAKA WRIT PETITION NO: 30410 0F 2011 Between:
M/s. Rollon Container, Rep. by its Partner Mr. Piyush Gadodia, S/o: late Sri Ashok Gadadia, Age 35 years, Office at Shed No. E, Sy.No.71lBlE, Old Kurnool Road, Katedan, Hyderabad.
...PETITIONER AND Central Power Distribution Company Limited, of Andhra Pradesh (APCPDCL) Rep. by its Assistant Divisional Engineer, Shivarampally, Gaganpahad, Opp to Police Academy, Hyderabad.
2. Gajanand Agarwal, S/o. Musadilal Agarwal, Hindu, Ro. Mahaboob Gunj, Hyderabad.
(R-2 is impleaded as per Court Order dt:22.11.11 in WPMP No.37879/2011) ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of lhe Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a Writ, Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus by declaring the action of the Respondent in trying to disconnect the Electricity supply for the premises of the Petitioner i.e. shed No. E, situated at Sy. No. TllBlElold Kurnool Road in Katedan lndustrial Area, R.R. District, as illegal, arbitrary and consequently direct the Respondent herein nol disconnect the Electricity supply for the above said premises of the Petitioner, in the interest of justice.
l.A. NO: 1OF 2011(WPMP. NO: 37678 0F 201.t) Petition under section 1sl cpc praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High cou( may be pleased to direct the respondent not to disconnect the electricity supply for the premises of the petitioner i.e. shed No. E, situated at Sy.No. 71tBtE old Kurnool road in Katedan lndusftial Area RR District pending disposal of the Wp. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRt pAWAN KUMAR AGARWAL Counsel for the Respondent No.1: SRt R. VINOD REDDY, SC FOR TSCPDCL Counsel for the Respondent No.2:-- The Court made the following: ORDER
THE HONOURABLE SRIIUSTICE NAGESH BHEEMAPAKA WRIT PETITION No.30410 of 2011 ORDER:
Today when the matter is taken up for hearing, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the cause in the writ petition does not survive for adjudication.
2.
Recording the above submission, this writ petition is dismissed as infrucfuous. No order as to costs.
As a sequel, the miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in the Writ Petition shall stand closed.
SD/. V.KAVITHA ASSISTANT R R //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFIGER To, '1. OneCCto Sri Pawan Kumar Agarwal, Advocate IOPUC]
2. One CC to Sri R. Vinod Reddy, Advocate [OPUC]
3. Two CD CoPies TJ GJ &"q
HIGH COURT DATED:2911212023 1t\E STATE v o -l o 2 3 JrN 2t2[ * t DF=-s PPIc,(
ORDER
WP.No.30410 ot 2011 DISMISSING THE WRIT PETITION AS INFRUCTUOUS WITHOUT COSTS.
r^4, rr\r[rq