- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33428 WP No. 17447 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V HOSMANI WRIT PETITION NO. 17447 OF 2025 (GM-KEB) BETWEEN: 1. SRI.M.SUDHARSHAN RAJU S/0 M. MUNSWAMI RAJU, AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS, PRESENTLY R.AT NO.24, RASHTRAKAVI KUVEMPU NAGAR, BTM 1ST STAGE, BENGALURU - 560 076. PERMANENT ADDRESS 5-27, D. RAJULURU CHOWDEPALLI DURGASAMUDRAM, DADEPALLERAJULUR, CHITTOOR, ANDHRA PRADESH-517 257. 2. SMT. K. VARSHITHA W/O M. SUDARSHAN RAJU, D/O K. CHANDRASEKHAR RAJU, AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS, PRESENTLY R/AT NO.24, RASHTRAKAVI KUVEMPU NAGAR, BTM 1ST STAGE, BENGALURU 560 076 PERMANENT ADDRESS 6-41, SETTIPETA, SETTIPETA, CHITTOOR, ANDHRA PRADESH-517 257 …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. MOHANKUMARA D., ADVOCATE) Digitally signed by GEETHAKUMARI PARLATTAYA S Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33428 WP No. 17447 of 2025 AND: 1. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER (ELE) BANGALORE ELECTRICITY SUPPLY COMPANY LIMITED (BESCOM), JAYANAGAR DIVISION, BESCOM, JAYANAGAR, BENGALURU - 560 078. 2. THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER (ELE) BANGALORE ELECTRICITY SUPPLY COMPANY LIMITED (BESCOM) S14 SUB-DIVISION, BESCOM, J.P. NAGAR, BENGALURU - 560 078. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI H.V.DEVARAJU, ADVOCATE FOR R2) THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF MANDAMUS OR ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE WRIT OR ORDER SEEKING A DIRECTION TO THE RESPONDENT NO.1 TO FORTHWITH RESTORE AND SUPPLY ELECTRICITY CONNECTION TO THE PETITIONERS BUILDING SITUATED AT SITE NO.24, PID NO.65-27-24, BTM 2ND STAGE, 1ST PHASE, RASHTRAKAVI KUVEMPU NAGARA, WITHIN THE JURISDICTION OF WARD NO.176, BBMP, BENGALURU, AS DETAILED IN THE REPRESENTATION DATED 15.06.2025 VIDE ANNEXURE-G AND ETC., THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN B-GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V HOSMANI - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33428 WP No. 17447 of 2025 ORAL ORDER Writ petition is filed seeking writ of mandamus directing respondent no.1 to restore power supply to petitioners' building. While considering representation at Annexures - G and G1 respectively. 2. Sri Aravind N, learned Advocate, appearing for Sri Mohan Kumara D, learned counsel for petitioners submitted, petitioners were absolute owners of site bearing no.24 PID no.65-27-24, BTM 2nd stage, I Phase, Rashtrakavi Kuvempu Nagar, Ward no.176, BBMP, Bengaluru, based on registered sale deed dated 18.08.2017 at Annexure-A. It was submitted, after purchase, petitioners got their names entered in revenue records and paying taxes. Thereafter they had obtained sanctioned plan and building licence to put up construction for commercial purpose over site. After completion, petitioners filed application on 25.03.2024 for sanction of power supply to an extent of 93KW. 3. Though, application was acknowledged on 16.04.2024 and approval granted, there was no progress insofar as providing permanent electricity supply. On other hand, - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33428 WP No. 17447 of 2025 petitioners were shocked about unilateral and unjust action of respondents in disrupting power supply to petitioners' premises. Since petitioners had put up construction after obtaining due building permission, sanction plan and licence, failure to provide permanent connection to petitioners' building was not justified and sought for allowing writ petition. 3. On other hand, HV Devaraju, learned counsel for respondent no.2 sought to oppose writ petition. It was submitted having given representation to respondents- authorities on 15.06.2025, even before lapse of reasonable amount of time thereafter, petitioners had rushed to this Court on 16.06.2025. On said ground sought for dismissal of petition. 4. Heard learned counsel and perused writ petition record. 5. From above, it is seen only relief sought is for writ of mandamus to direct respondents to consider petitioners' representation dated 15.06.2025 at Annexures -G and G1 respectively and to restore power supply to petitioners' building. Prima facie filing of representation by petitioners at Annexures-G and G1 and their pendency with respondents does - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33428 WP No. 17447 of 2025 not appear to be disputed. Petitioners had filed application for grant of power supply which is an essential service. Though sufficient time for respondents for taking action in pursuance of representation may not have been allowed, considering fact that power supply is an essential service and temporary power supply to petitioners premises was also disrupted, it is found appropriate to dispose of writ petition by directing respondents to consider representation of petitioners at Annexure - G and G.1 respectively in accordance with law within two weeks from receipt of certified copy of this order and keeping in mind directions issued by Hon'ble Supreme Court in para no.21 of Rajendra Kumar Barjatya & Anr. v. U.P.Avas Evam Vikas Parishad & Ors. reported in (2024) SCC OnLine SC 3767. Till then respondents are directed not to disrupt power supply to petitioners' premises subject to payment of advance consumption charges. Sd/- (RAVI V HOSMANI) JUDGE Psg*: List No.: 1 Sl No.: 48