Jagan Mohan Reddy Kotha, v. The State Of Telangana, Represented By Its Principal

l32s2l HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE SIXTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MRS JUSTICE SUREPALLI NANDA WRIT PETITION NOi9109 OF 2017 Between:

Jagan Mohan Reddy Kotha, S/o. Sri K. Jambul Reddy, Aged about 60 years, Occ Advocate, Rl/o. Plot No.109, Gafoor Nagar, lmage Hospital Road, Madhapur' Hvderabad - 500 081'

...pETraoNER AND

1. The State Of Telangana, Represented by its Principal, Secretary Power aM 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 lhe Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue an 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 my building in Plot No.'109, Gafoor Nagar, Madhapur, Hyderabad as illegal, nul and void and arbitrary and consequently direct the Respondents to release Power supply to my building in Plot No.109, Gafoor Nagar, Madhapur, Hyderabad without insisting to submit occupancy certificate. l.A. NO: 1 OF 2017(wPMP.

NO: 11286 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 Respondents to release Power supply to my building in Plot No.109, Gafoor Nagar, Madhapur, Hyderabad without insisting to submit occupancy certificate. Counsel for the Petitioner: DR. J.VIJAYALAXMI Counsel for the Respondent No.1: GP FOR ENERGY Counsel for the Respondent No.2: SRI R.

HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE SUREPALLI NANDA WRIT PETITION No.g1O9 OF 2017 ORDER:

It is represented by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner that the cause of action in the present writ petition does not survive for adjudication, any more. 2.

Bringing the said submission of the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner on record, the present writ petition is dismissed as infructuous. However, there shall be no order as to costs. 3.

The interim order granted on 15.03.2O27 passed in W.P.M.P.No.11286 of 2OL7 in W.P.No.91O9 of 2017 shall stand vacated.

Miscellaneous petitions, iF any, pending in this Writ Sd/- A. SRINIVASA REDDY ASSISTANI1 REGISTRAR / //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To I ?,13 33 jiJS J'X llAJAkff li,Affiff f 'l?

[Y"Jtate or re I a ns a n a, at . BIl #?1.[?Hl'*o, REDDY, S C rorrSSPDcL [oPUc]

4. Two CD CoPies PSK.

*, ),,

HIGH COURT DATED:0611112024 rc srAT€ c (i:!t-rl

ORDER

oo I B lt\N 2[25 -l WP.No.9109 of 2017 I i(j oEstatc\ DISMISSING THE WRIT PETITION AS INFRUCTUOUS WITHOUT COSTS.

/.,9 /tr I