Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 8538 (AP)

KASIREDDY RANGANATHA REDDY v. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

WP/4975/2025 · 2025-02-28

Venkateswarlu Nimmagadda

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

\ IN the high court OF ANDHRA PRADESH (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE TWENTY EIGHTH TWO THOUSAND AND ■■ AA/IARAVATI DAY OF FEBRUARY twenty five present the honourable SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU WRIT PFTItiom mo- nimimagadda 4975 OF 2n9i; Between; Kasire(J(jy Ranganatha 70 years. R/at D. Gudur, Tirupati District. Reddy, S/o K. No. 13/180, Raja Street Lakshminarayan Reddy > aged about Gangamma Temple Street, -PETITIONER s Principal Secretary (Energy J'Wmgs, Velagapudi, Guntur District, Andhra AND 1 • The State of Andhra r Department), Secretariat Pradesh. 2. Andhra Pradesh Southern (APSPDCL), Rep. by i Office, Tiruchanoor Road PadmavathiKalyanaMand Pradesh-517 501. 3. The Superintending Engineer APSPDCI r Tiruchanoor Road Srim, ' Office, ‘Sr District, Andhra Pradesh - 517 so 1, Pradesh, Rep. by it Power Distribution Corporation It's Chairman and Managing Director Srinivasapuram. Near Ltd. Corporate apam, Tirupati, Tirupati District Andhra Pradesh - 517 Tiruchanoor Road, apam, Tirupati, Tirupati -RESPONDENTS n of India praying that in therewith, the High Court Petition under Article the circumstances 226 of the Constitutio stated in the affidavit filed may be pleased to issue a Writ or order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus by declaring the action of Respondent Nos. 2 to 4 herein in not taking any necessary action in shifting the Transformer to a safe place away from the Petitioner's House in D. No. 13/180, Raja Street, Gangamma Temple Street, Gudur, Tirupati District as illegal, arbitrary and contrary to the Principles of Natural Justice and consequently, direct the Respondent Nos. 2 to 4 herein to consider the representations made by the Petitioner herein dated 11.11.2024; 26.12.2014; 05.02.2025. lA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the Respondent Nos. 2 to 4 herein to consider the representations made by the Petitioner herein dated 11.11.2024; 26.12.2014; 05.02.2025. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI A. S. C. BOSE Counsel for the Respondent No.1: GP FOR ENERGY Counsel for the Respondent Nos.2 to 4:SRI K.V.RAMA RAO, APSPDCL The Court made the following: ORDER • # APHC010092462025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3329] FRIDAY ,THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 4975/2025 Between: ...PETITIONER Kasireddy Ranganatha Reddy AND ...RESPONDENT(S) The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others Counsel for the Petitioner: 1.AS C BOSE Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.GP FOR ENERGY The Court made the following: * 2 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 4975/2025 ORDER: This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of the India seeking the following reliefs:- “to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of mandamus declaring the action of respondent Nos. 2 to 4 herein in not taking any necessary action in shifting the Transformer to a safe place away from the petitioner’s House in D.No.13/180, Raja Street, Gangamma Temple Street, Gudur, Tirupati District as illegal, arbitrary and contrary to the Principles of Natural Justice and consequently direct the respondent Nos. 2 to 4 herein to consider the representations made by the petitioner herein dated 11.11.2024, 26.12.2014 & 05.02.2025 and pass such other order. ” 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner acquired the subject house through a registered sale deed dated 04.08.2000. Since then, the petitioner has been residing in the said house. While things stood, the respondents herein installed 11KV transformer adjacent to the said house and later, the said transformer’s capacity was enhanced from 11KV to 160 KV, without considering the fact that the said building is used for residential purpose. For which, the petitioner made several representations to the respondent authorities. But the respondents neither considered the representations of the petitioner nor taken any action. Hence, the present Writ Petition. 4. Learned Standing Counsel for the respondents submits that the said transformer is established in a highly crowded residential area and all the safety measures were taken. Without there being any alternative land, it cannot be shifted and even for shifting, it requires so much charges/costs to be payable. If the petitioner provides alternative location as well as charges/costs if paid, the respondents are ready to locate the transformer. She further submits that pursuant to the representation, the respondents have inspected the premises and it is found that the department has taken care and safety measures, if some more measures requires, the respondents are ready to take safest measures instead of relocating the same. For relocation as demanded by the petitioner can be done subject to fulfillment of the two conditions as mentioned above. 5. In view of the submissions made by both the learned counsel, this Court is of the considered opinion that the present Writ Petition can be disposed of directing the respondents to consider the representation dated 05.02.2025 of the petitioner and appropriate orders with reference to the submissions as mentioned above, within a period of four(4) weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this Order. pass V 4 above direction, the Writ Petition is disposed of, 6. With the There shall be no order as to costs, sequel miscellaneous application, pending, if any, shall As a also stand closed. Sd/- W1 SRiNlVAS I assistant registrar //true copy// // SECTION OFFICER To, Principal secretary (Energy Department), State of Andhra Pradesh Guntur District, Andhra Pradesh. Director, Andhra Pradesh Southern (APSPDCL), Corporate Office, Padmavathi Kalyana 1. The Secretariat Buildings, Velagapudi and Managing 2. The Chairman Power Distribution Corporation Ltd. Road, Srinivasapuram, Near Mandapam, Tirupati, Tirupati District, Andhra Pradesh - 517 501. 3. The Superintending Engineer, APSPDCL Tiruchanoor Road, Srinivasapuram, Near Mandapam, Tirupati, Tirupati District, Andhra ' 4. The Deputy Engineer, APSPDCL. Corporate Office, ° Near Padmavathi KalyanaMandapam, Tirupati, Tirupati Tiruchanoor Office, Corporate Padmavathi Kalyana Srinivasapuram, District, Andhra Pradesh - 517 501. 5 One CC to Sri A. S. C. Bose, Advocate [OPUC] SCforAPSPDCLtOPUCl Court of Andhra Pradesh. [OUT] 6. One CC to Sri K.V. Rama Rao 7. Two CCS to GP for Energy, High 8. Three CD Copies. ssb HIGH COURT DATED:28/02/2025 ORDER WP.No.4975 of 2025 DISPOSING OF THE W.P. WITHOUT COSTS