The Hon’ble Sri Justice C.V.Nagarjuna Reddy Writ Petition No.33671 of 2014
Dated 10.11.2014
Between:
Palla Ramanaiah and 44 others …Petitioners And Govt. of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Secretary, Revenue Dept., Hyderabad and 4 others …Respondents Counsel for the petitioners: Mr.T.Sreedhar Counsel for the respondents: Mr.P.Vinod Kumar The Court made the following:
Order:
This Writ Petition is filed on apprehension that in pursuance of letter issued by respondent No.3 vide R.c.B.426/01, dated 05- 07-2014, respondent No.5 is likely to disconnect power supply to the petitioners’ respective service connections.
I have heard Mr.T.Sreedhar, learned Counsel for the petitioners, and the learned Counsel representing Mr.P.Vinod Kumar, learned Standing Counsel for the Andhra Pradesh Southern Power Distribution Company Limited (APSPDCL).
The perpetual lease granted in respect of 700 acres of land belonging to the petitioners and others was terminated by the State in the year 2008. Questioning the said termination, the petitioners filed WP.No.26022 of 2008 and this Court, by Order, dated 28.11.2008, in WPMP No.34049 of 2008, filed therein, granted interim order of status quo prevailing as on that date as to the nature and possession of the land.
It is the pleaded case of the petitioners that they have been cultivating their respective lands by using electrical pumps and that when one V.Krishna Rao applied for permission to install a new electrical motor, respondent No.3 addressed the impugned letter, dated 05-07-2014, to respondent No.5 wherein it is stated that in view of the order of status quo, if any electrical motor is installed, power supply shall be disconnected.
From the above-mentioned facts, it is evident that the order of status quo granted by this Court is with reference to the nature and possession of the land. The petitioners are evidently in possession of their respective lands. Therefore, they are entitled to enjoy the same without any hindrance under the order of status quo and for such enjoyment, electricity is the basic requirement. Respondent No.3 is, therefore, not justified in asking respondent No.5 to disconnect the power supply, if new electrical motor is installed in the lands in question.
The learned Counsel representing the learned Standing Counsel for APSPDCL submitted that respondent No.5 is not proposing to disconnect the power supply. This submission is in accordance with the spirit of the order of status quo granted by this Court.
In the light of the above fair submission of the learned Standing Counsel and the observations made herein above, the Writ Petition is disposed of with the direction to respondent No.5 not to disconnect the power supply only because of installation of new electrical motors by any of the petitioners in their respective lands.
As a sequel, WPMP.No.42122 of 2014, filed by the petitioners for interim relief, is disposed of as infructuous.
(C.V.Nagarjuna Reddy, J) Dt: 10th November, 2014
LUR