THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY Writ Petition No.13802 of 2010 (Dated : 06-07-2010) Between: Mungala Gangama and two others ..Petitioners A n d The Greater Visakhapatnam Municipal Corporation, Rep. By its Commissioner, Visakhapatnam &others …Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY Writ Petition No.13802 of 2010 ORDER: This writ petition has been filed by the petitioners, who are three in number, assailing the action of the respondents in refusing to restore the power supply for the thatched house in their occupation. 2. The petitioners claim that they are the legal representatives of one Appalanaidu. The said Appalanaidu constructed a thatched house in an extent of 60 square yards in Survey No.110 of Chinamushidivada Revenue village, Pendurthy Mandal, Visakhapatnam District about 40 years ago. He died on 24.01.2004. The petitioners being his legal representatives continue to reside in the said house. The house was assessed to property tax by the then Gram Panchayat under assessment No.392 and house tax is being paid under the said assessment number. Appalanaidu got power connection under Service Connection No.1677. The Gram Panchayat made a resolution on 6.6.2003 recommending their case for issuance of house patta. 3. While so, the Mandal Revenue Officer, instructed the petitioners to remove the house. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner preferred Writ Petition No.15009 of 2003. The said writ petition was disposed of on 19.8.2009. The relevant portion of the order passed in the said writ petition reads as hereunder:- “ The counter does not dispute that the petitioners were not given any notice before removing the thatched house which they put up in Survey No.110, in respect of which, they obtained power connection and panchayat tax assessment number. The action of the first respondent, therefore, is legally unsustainable and it violates principles of natural justice. It is well settled that even an encroacher of Government land has to be evicted by following due process of law. Be that as it is, petitioners have already been removed from the encroachment and they also made a representation for assignment of house site patta. The same may be considered by the first respondent as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Even if the petitioners are eligible for assignment of house sites, they may be allotted suitable land”. 4. The writ petitioners claim to have submitted a representation to the respondents for restoration of power supply. There being no action on the part of the respondents, petitioners invoked the jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the prayer stated supra. 5. When the writ petition came up for admission, Sri N.Ranga Reddy, takes notice on behalf of respondents 1 and 2. Learned Standing Counsel Sri O.Manohar Reddy takes notice on behalf of respondent No.3. 6. The fact remains that the house put up by the petitioners came to be demolished and thereupon, the petitioners rectified the demolition portion and sought for restoration of power supply. In that view of the matter, I deem it appropriate to direct the petitioners to make fresh application to the respondent No.3 for release of new connection. In the event of such application being filed by the petitioners, the same shall be considered and disposed of in accordance with the guidelines in force. 7. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. No costs. ______________________ B.SESHASAYANA REDDY, J Dt.06-7-2010 Note:- Issue CC within three days (B/o) RAR THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY Writ Petition No.13802 of 2010 (Dated : 06-07-2010)