Khaja MoenuddIn Vs. A.P. State Electricity Board and anr.

Khaja Moenuddin vs A.P. State Electricity Board and anr.

Type Court Judgment Court Andhra Pradesh Decided Aug 01, 2001

~4 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/446987

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/446987
Court: Andhra Pradesh High Court
Judge: Ghulam Mohammed, J.
Decided On: Aug 01, 2001
Case Number: W.P. No. 28977 of 1998
Subject: Electricity

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

- CANTONMENTS ACT[C.A. No. 41/2006]. Section 346 & Cantonment Fund (Servants Rules, 1937, Rules 13, 14 & 15: [H.L. Gokhale, Ag. CJ, P.V. Hardas, Naresh H. Patil, R.M. Borde & R.M. Savant, JJ] Jurisdiction of School Tribunal Constituted under Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools (Conditions of Service) Regulation...

Key legal issue: Electricity

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Khaja Moenuddin

Advocate Kurity Bhaskara Rao, Adv.

Respondent

A.P. State Electricity Board and anr.

Advocate K.N. Jwala, S.C. for TRANSCO

Legal References

Reported In: 2001(5)ALT89

Excerpt

.....schools (conditions of service) regulations act, 1978 [act no. 3/1978]. sections 9 & 2(21): jurisdiction of school tribunal whether a school run by cantonment board is not a recognised school within the meaning of section 2(21)? - held, the act is enacted to regulate recruitments and conditions of employees in certain private schools and provisions of the act shall apply to all private schools in the state whether receiving any grant-in-aid from the state government or not. private school is defined in section 2(2) of the act as a recognised school established or administered by a management other than the government or a local authority. recognised means recognised by director, the divisional board or state board. thus as far as the first part of the definition of being recognised is concerned, it includes, as stated above, four directors, the divisional boards and four state boards. the second part of this definition which comes after the comma refers to any officer authorised by director or by any of such boards. the question to be examined is whether school run by the cantonment board could be said to be one run by any such boards. a private school has to be recognised by the state or the divisional board or by any officer authorised in that behalf. when this phrase namely: recognised by any officer authorised by the director or by any such boards, is included in the latter part of section 2(21), such boards will be of the level of the state board or the divisional board. the boards referred to in the definition of the word recognised means the boards which deal with education at levels other than that of the level at which primary schools are operating. thus for being recognised, the school has to be recognised by the board and therefore, it has to be operating at a higher level i.e., secondary level. section 2(21) of the act defines the term recognised. the last clause therein is by any of such boards. the term such is defined in oxford dictionary as..........condition no. 3.2. of the terms and conditions of supply, reads as follows:'3. requisition for supply of energy...........'3.2. an intending consumer, who is not the owner of the premises he occupies, shall, if so required by the board, give proof of his being in lawful occupation of the premises and also execute an indemnity bond indemnifying the board, against any losses on account of disputes arising out of the release of service to the occupant.'6. in the counter affidavit filed by the respondents, inter alia, it was stated that the petitioner has not submitted any application seeking fresh connection. it is also stated that the petitioner has not paid the arrears.7. however, during the course of hearing, the learned counsel for the petitioner has produced receipts dated 3-8-1998 and 25-9-1998 evidencing the payment amounting to rs. 10,130/-. in the facts and circumstances of the case, this writ petition is disposed of directing the petitioner to make application to the 2nd respondent seeking fresh connection, by paying necessary charges including any arrears, if any, within two weeks from the date or receipt of a copy of this order. on such application being filed, the 2nd respondent shall consider the same and pass appropriate orders within two weeks thereafter.8. with the above directions, the writ petition is disposed of. no costs.

Full Judgment

ORDER

Ghulam Mohammed, J.

1. The controversy raised in this writ petition rests on a narrow compass namely as to whether the petitioner who is tenant of the premises at Lothkunta, Malkajgiri Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, after disconnection of the power supply, without applying for fresh connection for power supply, can demand for continuation of the supply existing in the name of the registered consumer.

2. The petitioner claims to be tenant in respect of the shop bearing Nos. 14-17 to 14-19 of Lothkunta, Malkajgiri Mandal, Ranga Reddy district. It is averred that the petitioner obtained the said premises on lease for a period of three years and that some differences have arisen between the tenant and the landlord with regard to enhancement of rent and consequently the petitioner moved the Court of the Junior Civil Judge, East and North, Ranga Reddy District in O.S.No. 518 of 1997 and obtained interim injunction against the landlord. Counterblast to his suit, the landlord also filed another suit. Be that as it may, on 7-9-1997, the 2nd respondent herein disconnected the electric supply without any notice. The petitioner initially filed Writ Petition No. 26323 of 1998 questioning the action of the respondents in disconnecting the power supply. This Court in W.P.No. 26323 of 1998 dated 23-9-1998 has passed the following order:

'You are directed to release the service connection No. 1256 subject to the petitioner paying all outstanding dues in respect of the above mentioned service connection. It is also made clear that this arrangement is only as stop gap arrangement to enable the petitioner to approach the jurisdictional forum for seeking restoration of essential service to building. This will be in operation only for a period of three weeks from the date of restoration.'

3. As per the directions of this Court the petitioner has paid all outstandings as on 23-9-1998 and thereafter power supply was provided. Subsequently, it is averred by the petitioner that he filed an application before the 2nd respondent requesting to treat him as a new consumer and provide meter to his shop. However, his application was not considered. The petitioner therefore seeks directions to direct the respondents to treat the petitioner as a new consumer by continuing existing meter No. 1256.

4. I have heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned Counsel for the respondent Corporation.

5. Learned Counsel for the petitioner contended that lease is subsisting in favour of the petitioner and his possession is lawful, as per condition No. 3.2. of the terms and conditions of supply, the petitioner is entitled to get new service connection. Condition No. 3.2. of the terms and conditions of supply, reads as follows:

'3. Requisition for supply of energy...........

'3.2. An intending consumer, who is not the owner of the premises he occupies, shall, if so required by the Board, give proof of his being in lawful occupation of the premises and also execute an indemnity bond indemnifying the Board, against any losses on account of disputes arising out of the release of service to the occupant.'

6. In the counter affidavit filed by the respondents, inter alia, it was stated that the petitioner has not submitted any application seeking fresh connection. It is also stated that the petitioner has not paid the arrears.

7. However, during the course of hearing, the learned Counsel for the petitioner has produced receipts dated 3-8-1998 and 25-9-1998 evidencing the payment amounting to Rs. 10,130/-. In the facts and circumstances of the case, this writ petition is disposed of directing the petitioner to make application to the 2nd respondent seeking fresh connection, by paying necessary charges including any arrears, if any, within two weeks from the date or receipt of a copy of this order. On such application being filed, the 2nd respondent shall consider the same and pass appropriate orders within two weeks thereafter.

8. With the above directions, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs.

Same Court & Year Andhra Pradesh · 2001 Same Parties Khaja Moenuddin vs A.P. State Electricity Board and anr. Same Subject Electricity Same Judge Ghulam Mohammed, J.

Electricity