G Muralidar v. Prl.Secy.,Energy Dept., Hyd., And Another,

132521 HIGH COURT.FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE FIFTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MRS JUSTICE SUREPALLI NANDA WRIT PETITION NO: 6242 OF 2017 Between:

G Muralidar, S/o G. SwamyAged about 42years, Rl/o. Plot No.8'l/10, Sy. No. 77 Madhapur, Hyderabad.

...PETITIONER AND

1. The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Power and Energy Department Secretariat, Hyderabad - 500 022

2. Southern Power Distribution Company of Telangana Ltd, Rep., by its Director Operations At Ameerpet, Hyderabad.

RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate Writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondents in not releasing the power supply to the petitioner building in Plot No. 82111 in Sy. No. 77 of Madhapur, Hyderabad as illegal, null, void, arbitrary and consequently direct the respondents to release the power supply without insisting to occupancy certificate. l.A. NO: 1 OF 2017(WPMP.

NO: 7646 OF 2017) Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the 2nd Respondent to release the power supply to the petitioner building in Plot No. B2l1 1, in Sy. No. 77 of Madhapur, Hyderabad for Ground + 3 Floors only. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI K.DURGA PRASAD Counsel for the Respondent No.1: AGP FOR ENERGY Counsel for the Respondent No.2: SRI R.

HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE SUREPALLI NANDA WRIT PETITION No.6242 OF 2017 ORDER:

Heard Sri K. Durga Prasad, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Energy, appearing on behalf of respondent No,l and Sri R. Vinod Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for TGSPDCL, appearing on behalf of respondent No.2 2, The petitioner approached the Court seeking prayer as under:

" ...to issue an appropriate Writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondents in not releasing the power supply to the petitioner I I building in Plot No. 82/lt in Sy. No. 77 of Madhapur Hyderabad as illegal, null, void, arbitrary and consequently direct the respondents to release the power supply without insisting to occupancy certificate and to pass...".

wP 6242 2011 3.

It is represented by both the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioher and the learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent No.2 that by virtue of the interim order passed in favour of the petitioner on 22.02.2017 in W.p.M.p. No. 7646 oF 2077 no further orders are necessary.

4, Bringing the said submission of both the learned counsel on record, the writ petition i, closed. However, there shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, the miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in the Writ petition shall atso stand closed. Sd/. A. SRINIVASA REDDY ASSISTANT //TRUE COPY// SEC N OFFICER To One CC to SRI K.DURGA PRASAD, Advocate [OPUCI Two CCs to GP for ENERGY, High Court for the Statebf Telangana, at Hyderabad. [OUT] One CC to SRI R.VINOD REDDY, S.C. for TGSPDCL [OPUC] Two CD Copies PSK.

MP /,-

,- HIGH COURT DATED:0511112024 ri a( (, I.

0I ur ?fi25 oo

ORDER

lL*_---...

WP.No.6242 ot 2017 CLOSING THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS.

4,n /ru