HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.34062 of 2011 Date: 26.12.2011 Between: T.Someshwar ..... Petitioner And: A.P. Central Power Distribution Company Limited, reptd by its Chairman, Vidyuth Soudha, Hyderabad and another. .....Respondents Counsel for the Petitioner: Sri Babuji Tenneti Counsel for the Respondents: Sri O.Manoher Reddy Standing Counsel for APCPDCL The Court made the following: ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed for a Mandamus to declare the inaction of the respondents in responding to the petitioner’s representation, dated 21.12.2011, for shifting of the transformer fixed infront of his house, as illegal and arbitrary. I have heard Sri Babuji Tenneti, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for APCPDCL representing the respondents. The petitioner claims to be owner of house bearing No.16-2-741/B/47 of Asmangadh, Malakpet, Hyderabad. He has pleaded that the transformer was temporarily erected touching his house. When the petitioner noticed that the respondents are attempting to erect the transformer permanently, he tried to resist the same and that, when the sub-ordinates of the respondents insisted on going ahead with the work, the petitioner made representation, dated 21.12.2011, to respondent No.2 requesting him to refrain from erecting the transformer. As this representation is stated to have not yielded any result, the petitioner has filed the present Writ Petition. Purporting to support his plea that the transformer already erected is touching the wall of the petitioner’s house, he has filed three photographs. A careful perusal of these photographs reveals that there is at least three feet distance between the transformer, which is temporarily erected, and the outer wall of the petitioner’s house. Thus, as of now, there does not seem to be any possibility of the transformer or any wires connected to it touching the petitioner’s house. It is not the pleaded case of the petitioner that the place over which the transformer is presently erected on temporary basis belongs to him. The photographs disclose that the transformer is on the margin of a public street. Therefore, the petitioner cannot have any objection for erection of the transformer. Accordingly, no relief as sought for in the Writ Petition can be granted to the petitioner. Before parting with this case, it needs to be observed that at present, the transformer is erected almost encroaching on the public street. Its placement is in such a position that it not only obstructs free movement of traffic but also is likely to endanger the lives of the passers-by. The respondents are directed to move the transformer from the present place towards the end of the road margin in such a way that neither it touches the petitioner’s house nor it causes obstruction to the traffic and danger to the passers- by. Subject to the above directions, the Writ Petition is disposed of. As a sequel to disposal of the Writ Petition, W.P.M.P.No.42376 of 2011 filed by the petitioner for interim relief is disposed of as infructuous. __________________________ C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J 26th December 2011 DR