IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE FIFTEENTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION NO : 14437 of 2008 Between: Mahalakshmi Colony Welfare Association, Mansurabad, L.B. Nagar, Hyderabad, Rep. by as its Vice President, A. Pushpanjali, W/o. A. Prabhakar, aged 40 years Housewife R/o. 5- 4-56, Block No. 40, Flat No. G-1 Mansurabad, L.B. Nagar, R.R. District, Hyderabad. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 Central Power Distribution Company of Andhra Pradesh, Ltd., Rep. by Asst. Engineer/Elecl, Autonagar Section, Ranga Reddy District. 2 Central Power Distribution Company of Andhra Pradesh Ltd. Rep. by its Chairman & Managing Director, Hyderabad. 3 The Deputy Executive Engineer (Housing) Urban Division, Lakadikapool, A.P. State Housing Corporation Limited, Ranga Reddy. .....RESPONDENT(S) Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Aﬃdavit ﬁled herein the High Court will be pleased to issue a Writ of Mandamus declaring "the letter No. SA/01/VAMBAY/ RRE/07 dt. 14-5-2008 of the 3rd Respondent as illegal, without jurisdiction and set aside the same and further declare the action of the Respondents No. 1 & 2 in disconnecting the Power Connection Given to the Houses of the Members of petitioners association as illegal, improper unjust arbitrary and further direct the respondents 1 to 2 to provide electricity connection to the houses of the members of the petitioner's association and pass such other order or orders. Counsel for the Petitioner : MR. K.RAMAMOHAN-MAHADEVA Counsel for the Respondents : O.MANOHAR REDDY(SC FOR APTRANSCO) The Court made the following : THE HON’BLE Ms. JUSTICE G. ROHINI WRIT PETITION No.14437 OF 2008 ORDER : The petitioner claims to be an association registered under the Societies Registration Act. This writ petition is filed seeking a declaration that the action of the 3rd respondent in rejecting to provide electricity service connection to Mansoorabad Vambay Housing Colony as arbitrary and illegal. In the aﬃdavit ﬁled in support of the application, it is stated that the members of the petitioner association were earlier members of Prathibha Mahila Mandali Association at whose request the Government identiﬁed Ac.9.30 guntas of land in Sy.No.5193 of Mansoorabad Village for construction of houses for 940 members. Though the beneﬁciaries were also identiﬁed, no pattas were granted. Aggrieved by the same, Prathibha Mahila Mandali Association ﬁled W.P.No.20312 of 2004 and the same was disposed of by order dated 5.11.2004 directing the respondents therein to take necessary steps to proceed with the construction of houses to all the beneﬁciaries against whom there were no complaints. In the meanwhile the Government after enquiry, delivered pattas to the beneficiaries. The Government also sanctioned 40 houses in Vambay Housing Colony through Hyderabad Urban Development Authority. However, there was delay in taking further steps and ultimately by the year 2007, 300 houses were made ready for occupation. Since the possession of the said houses was not handed over to the members of the association, Prathibha Mahila Mandali was constrained to ﬁle W.P.No.8377 of 2007. Thereafter, as per the instructions of the District Manager, Rangareddy Housing Corporation, the 3rd respondent prepared the list of 210 beneﬁciaries and the certiﬁcates for allotment were handed over to the beneﬁciaries on 18.8.2007 who are all the members of the petitioner association. Pursuant thereto, the members of the petitioner association occupied houses on 16.10.2007 and since then they have been residing in their respective houses. However, the local people who have nothing to do with the said allotments started interfering with their possession. Consequently, the petitioner association made a representation to the Commissioner of Police, Cyberabad and Station House Oﬃcer, L.B. Nagar to provide protection to the life and property of the members of the petitioner association. Since the Commissioner of Police failed to take any action, the petitioner association ﬁled W.P.No.1048 of 2008. During pendency of the said writ petition, the petitioner association made a representation to the respondents 1 and 2 herein to provide electricity service connections to their houses. Pursuant thereto, the respondents 1 and 2 directed the members of the petitioner association to pay the registration amount of Rs.120/- by each member for obtaining electricity service connection under domestic category. Accordingly, some of the members of the petitioner association paid registration fee and the meters were sanctioned and the same were also ﬁxed to their respective houses. While so, the 3rd respondent – A.P. State Housing Corporation Limited by letter dated 14.5.2008 requested the respondents 1 and 2 not to give electrical connection to the colony. Basing on that the respondents 1 and 2 highhandedly took back the meters which were allotted to the members of the petitioner association and stopped electricity supply. Hence, the present writ petition. In the counter-aﬃdavit ﬁled on behalf of the respondents 1 and 2, it is stated that 18 persons registered their names with Integrated Consumer Service Centre, Kothapet and paid registration fee for electrical connection. The said applications were registered and were sent to the section oﬃce along with meters for installation. Though meters were installed in some houses, no power supply was released. At that stage, the Deputy Executive Engineer, A.P. Housing Corporation Limited addressed a letter dated 14.5.2008 stating that the allotment of plots to the beneﬁciaries is under enquiry with regard to the eligibility of the beneﬁciaries and therefore the power connections may be stopped. I have heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Counsel appearing for the respondents 1 and 2. As could be seen from the material on record, it appears that there is some dispute with regard to the eligibility of the beneﬁciaries and an enquiry has been initiated by the 3rd respondent. It is also apparent that though 18 beneﬁciaries got their names registered with the Integrated Consumer Service Centre by paying the requisite amounts and the meters were also installed in the houses, the power supply was not released only on the basis of the letter addressed by the 3rd respondent. It is not necessary for this Court to go into the questions regarding the nature of the alleged enquiry pending and the eligibility of the members of the petitioner association. So far as the impugned action of the respondents 1 and 2 is concerned, since admittedly power supply is withheld only on the ground that the enquiry is pending as to the eligibility of the beneﬁciaries, I am of the opinion that the respondents 1 and 2 are not justiﬁed in acting upon the letter addressed by the 3rd respondent without giving an opportunity to the persons who got themselves registered with the Integrated Consumer Service Centre, to make their representation. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents 1 and 2 to issue notice to all the consumers who got themselves registered with Integrated Consumer Service Centre within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of this order calling upon them to show- cause as to why the power supply to their houses should not be withheld. Thereafter, it is open to those consumers to submit their explanation, in which event the respondents 1 and 2 shall consider the same and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law within a period of two weeks thereafter. Writ Petition is accordingly disposed of. No costs. ______________ G. ROHINI, J. Dt. 15.10.2008 gbs