IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF OCTOBER, 2019 BEFORE:
THE HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE S.SUJATHA WRIT PETITION No.51915/2017(GM-KEB) BETWEEN MS. SHESHI HENGSU D/O. SRI. JATTU DEVADIGA, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, RESIDENT OF AJJIMANE, HENBERU, PADUVARI GRAMA, BAINDOOR TALUK.
(BY SRI CHAITANYA, ADVOCATE FOR SRI ARUNA SHYAM M, ADVOCATE) AND 1. MANGALURU ELECTRICITY SUPPLY COMPANY LIMITED (MESCOM) ...PETITIONER REGISTERED OFFICE AT MESCOM BHAVAN, KAVOOR CROSS ROAD, BEJAI, MANGALURU-575 004, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR.
2. THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER OFFICE OF THE MESCOM, MESCOM BHAVAN, KAVOOR CROSS ROAD, BEJAI, MANGALURU-575 004.
3. CHAIRMAN OF KERC 9/2 6TH AND 7TH FLOOR, MAHALAKSHMI CHAMBERS, M G ROAD, BENGALURU, KARNATAKA 560001 4. SECRETARY ENERGY DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA SECRETARIAT, VIKASA SOUDHA, DR AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU.
…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI H V DEVARAJU, ADVOCATE FOR R1 & R2 SRI MAYANNA, ADVOCATE FOR M/S LAWYERS IN, ADVOCATES FOR R3 MS. NILOUFER AKBAR, AGA FOR R4) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH OF THE ENDORSEMENT THEREBY ISSUING ENDORSEMENT STATING THAT THE RESPONDENTS CANNOT GIVE ELECTRICITY CONNECTION TO THE PETITIONER DUE TO PENDING LITIGATION BEFORE THIS HON’BLE COURT IN RSA.291/2016 AT ANNEXURE-A AND ETC.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
O R D E R The petitioner has challenged the endorsement No.SaKaaIm (V)/SaLeAa/Ka-34, whereby the supply of power connection to the petitioner’s premises has been denied, in view of the pendency of RSA No.291/2016 before this Court.
2. In view of the interim order passed by this Court, power supply has been given to the petitioner’s premises by installation bearing R.R.No.BYB 54378 in the name of the petitioner on 21.12.2017. Statement of objections has been filed by the respondents No.1 and 2 to the said effect.
3. Learned Counsel for the respondents No.1 and 2 submits that in view of the same, the writ petition does not survive for consideration. The said submission is placed on record.
4. In view of the aforesaid, writ petition stands dismissed as having rendered infructuous.
Sd/- JUDGE JT/-