THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE
AND
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N.V.SHRAVAN KUMAR
WRIT APPEAL No.875 of 2023
JUDGMENT: (Per the Hon'ble the Chief Justice Alok Aradhe)
Mr. Vanam Vishwanatham, learned counsel for the
appellant.
Mr. B.Arjun, learned counsel representing
Mr. Ch.Koteswara Rao, learned counsel for respondents
No.1 to 3.
Mr. T.Bala Mohan Reddy, learned counsel for
respondent No.4.
Mr. R.Vinod Reddy, learned counsel for respondent
No.5.
2. With the consent of the parties, the matter is heard
finally.
3. This intra court appeal has been filed against the
order dated 08.08.2023 passed by the learned Single Judge
in I.A.No.2 of 2023 in W.P.No.15257 of 2023 by which the
2
interim order granted in favour of the appellant on
16.06.2023 has been vacated.
4. Facts
giving rise to filing of this appeal briefly stated are that the appellant/writ petitioner filed the writ petition seeking a direction to respondents No.1 to 3 and respondent No.5 in the writ petition not to disconnect the power supply to the appellant's service connection. Learned Single Judge by an interim order dated 16.06.2023 directed the official respondents not to disconnect the electricity supply to the appellant's service connection located in Survey No.491 measuring Acs.4.39 guntas situated at Mallareddypet Village, Gambiraopet Mandal, Rajanna Sircilla District.
5. The private respondent in the writ petition filed an application seeking vacation of the aforesaid interim order. The learned Single Judge thereupon after hearing the parties, by an order dated 08.08.2023, has vacated the ad interim order. The learned Single Judge held that the appellant had furnished an undertaking that in case of any objection, the authorities can disconnect the electricity 3 supply. In the aforesaid factual background, this writ appeal has been filed.
6. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the appellant has right to claim electricity connection, irrespective of the fact that whether or not appellant has title in respect of the property in question.
7. On the other hand, learned counsel for the private respondent submitted that the appellant has obtained electricity connection by playing fraud and therefore he cannot be allowed to take the benefit of electricity connection.
8. We have considered the submissions made on both sides and have perused the record.
9. Right to electricity is a part of right to life which in turn is guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. The appellant is admittedly in possession of the subject property on which borewell is situated. Therefore, he is entitled to the electricity connection. Mere grant of electricity connection has no bearing on the question of 4 title in respect of the property which, in any case, is pending adjudication in a suit. The learned Single Judge ought to have appreciated that in case the interim order is vacated, the appellant shall suffer irreparable prejudice as it will cause damage to his standing crops. Therefore, the learned Single Judge, in the peculiar facts of the case, ought not to have vacated the ad interim order.
10. For the aforementioned reasons, the impugned order dated 08.08.2023 passed by the learned Single Judge is set aside. The official respondents are restrained from disconnecting the electricity supply to the property in question during the pendency of the writ petition. It is made clear that the observations made in this order have been only made for the purpose of deciding this writ appeal and shall have no bearing on the writ petition which is pending before the learned Single Judge for adjudication. All the contentions are kept open which can be raised by learned counsel for the parties.
11. Writ appeal is accordingly allowed. 5
Miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. However, there shall be no order as to costs.
______________________________________ ALOK ARADHE, CJ ______________________________________ N.V.SHRAVAN KUMAR, J 04.09.2023 vs