1. The present writ petition is filed aggrieved by the action of the authorities of DISCOM in removing the Electricity Connection bearing No.4611133000468 to the petitioner-Trust, as illegal, arbitrary etc., and for restoration of power connection.

2. Mr.Y.Nagi Reddy, learned arguing counsel inter alia submits that the 1st petitioner-Trust was formed with an object to render service and the revenue- authorities allotted land of an extent of Ac.0.54 cent in Survey No.846-A 10 of Singarakonda Palem Village in the year 2008. He submits that the 1st petitioner-Trust as a part of service activities, took a decision to construct some rooms, and with a view to avail power supply, made an application on 17.02.2025 by paying requisite fees to the authorities of DISCOM. He submits that pursuant to the said application, the 6th respondent granted LTII commercial category connection to the Trust and a service meter was also provided on 20.02.2025. He submits that surprisingly, five days after granting electricity connection, for the reasons not known to the petitioner, the service connection was disconnected. He also submits that subsequently on 25.04.2025, the authorities of DISCOM have removed the meter and other equipment, without assigning any reasons. He submits that before resorting to disconnection of supply or removal of meter, no notice was issued to the petitioners and therefore, the action of the respondent-DISCOM authorities is contrary to Law and violative of principles of natural justice. He submits that after submitting the relevant documents including the ‘No Objection Certificate’ from 8th respondent-Gram Panchayat, the power supply to the petitioner – Trust was released and if at all, the respondent-authorities intend to initiate serious action of disconnection of power supply, the petitioners should be put on prior notice and call for objections to the proposed action of disconnection. He submits that such a procedure has not been adhered to in the present case and therefore, the action of the authorities of DISCOM in disconnecting the power supply and removal of the meter etc; without issuing any notice is liable to be declared as violative of principles of natural justice, unsustainable in Law and consequently directions for restoration of the power supply may be ordered. The learned counsel also relies on the decision of this Court dated 22.03.2024 in W.P.No.7120 of 2024.

3. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the respondent-DISCOM sought to justify the action of the respondent authorities in disconnecting the power supply. Referring to the various averments in the counter-affidavit filed by respondent Nos.2 to 6, he submits that in view of the objections raised by one Mr.Ramakrishna Paramahamsa, Chairman of the Trust, the officials of DISCOM visited site, where the new service connection referred to above was given, it was found that there was no building or any bore well and it is only a vacant site. Further that the service connection in question was obtained without submission of proper documents to the DISCOM authorities. Therefore, the service was disconnected on 25.02.2025. He also submits that the Panchayat Secretary of the 8th respondent-Gram Panchayat though has initially granted ‘No Objection Certificate’ to the petitioner-Trust for securing the electricity connection, subsequently they noticed that there are no proper documents in the name of the Trust and mistakenly issued ‘No Objection Certificate’. Referring to Para No.7 of the counter-affidavit, he further submits that the second petitioner did not produce any ‘consent’ or ‘resolution’ or ‘No Objection’ from the Trust members for release of new service connection in the name of the second petitioner and that despite redressal of the petitioners’ grievance under complaint dated 21.04.2025, the petitioner-Trust filed the present writ petition, more particularly at the instance of the second petitioner, who illegally obtained the above mentioned service connection for his personal use, but not for the benefit of the first petitioner-Trust. Making the said submissions, the learned counsel seeks dismissal of the writ petition.

4. In reply, the learned counsel for the petitioners has drawn the attention of this Court to Ex.P8 and submits that the disconnection to the service in question effected at the instance of one Mr.P.Ramakrishna Paramahamsa, who claims to be the Chairman of the Trust, is not tenable, that Ex.P8 clearly shows that the members of the Trust on 24.03.2024 have removed the said Ramakrishna Paramhamsa as the Chairman of the Trust. Be that as it may.

5. He submits that the authorities of the DISCOM having released the supply in the name of the petitioner-Trust, as is evident from the electricity bills (Ex.P12), is not justified in entertaining the complaint of some third party who claims to be the Chairman of the Trust and disconnecting the power supply, that too without issuing any notice. He also submits that as per the provisions of the Electricity Act viz., Section 43 (1), the occupier of any premises is entitled for supply of electricity and for that matter, even an unauthorized occupier of a premises is entitled to seek electricity connection. Be that as it may. As the power is disconnected and meter, equipment etc., are taken away high handedly, the writ petition deserves to be allowed.

6. This Court has considered the submissions made and perused the material on record.

7. Before dealing with the relevant contentions, it is pertinent to note that there is no dispute with regard to the application for providing service connection and sanctioning of the same by the authorities of DISCOM. Ex.P4, dated 17.02.2025 goes to show that the application was made in the name of Kakatiya Seva Trust. Even the online electricity bill at Page No.60 of the material filed along with writ affidavit, reflects the customer’s name as Kakatiya Seva Trust. If that be the undisputed position, the stand in the counter-affidavit to the effect that the service connection was obtained by the second petitioner for personal use, merits no appreciation. Further, as seen from the averments made in the counter-affidavit and the letter dated 22.02.2025 enclosed to the same, it would be clear that at the behest of one Ramakrishna Paramahamsa, stated to be the Chairman of the Trust, the power supply was disconnected. Such an action on the part of the DISCOM authorities, merely on the basis of some letter, without ascertaining the correctness of otherwise of the contents of the letter, cannot be appreciated. It appears that as though by their acts and averments in the counter-affidavit, they are recognizing the said Ramakrishna Paramahamsa as the Chairman of the first petitioner-Trust. Instead of entertaining his complaint vide letter, dated 22.02.2025 straight away, the authorities of DISCOM should have issued an appropriate notice to the petitioners, calling upon them to furnish the information and satisfy themselves that the petitioners obtained the power connection by furnishing / submitting the relevant documents. Such a course of action was not adopted, for the reasons best known to the concerned authorities. Be that as it may. When once the power supply is released in favour of any consumer, if the authorities of the distribution companies are intending to initiate any action, after granting service connection as per Law / principles of natural justice, notice to the effected party has to be issued. Compliance with the said requirement, is all the more essential as the action sought to be initiated would seriously effect the rights of the parties under Article 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India. As noted earlier, in the case on hand, the power supply was provided on 17.02.2025 and within no time, pursuant to the letter dated 22.02.2025 referred to above, not only supply was disconnected but subsequently the meter was removed.

8. It is settled legal position that the action of the authorities concerned shall be governed by Rule of Law and arbitrary and high handed actions cannot be countenanced. If the concerned authorities are given to understand that the power supply was obtained without supporting documents, by suppression of facts or in any manner not approved by Law, it is the bounden duty of the concerned officers to initiate action by following due process of Law, i.e., by issuing appropriate notices. Any action on the part of the authorities concerned, without adhering to the principles of Law or in violation of principles of natural justice, cannot withstand the judicial scrutiny and liable to be declared as illegal.

9. In the present case, though the issue as to the chairmanship of the Kakatiya Seva Trust is not germane for consideration, still the action of the DISCOM authorities at the behest of said Ramakrishna Paramahamsa, as if he is Chairman of the first petitioner-Trust, without notice is not tenable.

10. In the decision of High Court of Delhi dated 14.11.2022 in W.P.(C).No.13217 of 2019, it was inter alia observed as follows:

                  “6.There is no gainsaying that electricity is an essential service, of which a person cannot be deprived without cogent, lawful reason. It is well-settled law that even if disputes exist as to ownership of the property at which an electricity connection is sought, the concerned authorities cannot deprive the legal occupant thereof by insisting that an NOC be furnished from others who also claim to be owners. Under a similar circumstances, where a request for supply of electricity connection was declined to a tenant by the authorities, the Supreme Court in Dilip (Dead) through Lrs., v. Satish & Others, Criminal Appeal No.810/2022 observed as under:-

                  “….It is now well settled proposition of law that electricity is a basic amenity of which a person cannot be deprived. Electricity cannot be declined to a tenant on the ground of failure / refusal of the landlord to issue no objection certificate. All that the electricity supply authority is required to examine is whether the applicant for electricity connection is in occupation of the premises in question.”

11. Even appreciating the submission made on behalf of the respondents to the effect that there is no building or bore well in the site where new electricity service connection was provided (See: Para No.2 of the counter-affidavit), then also the authorities of DISCOM are under legal obligation to issue notice to the petitioners before resorting to disconnection of power supply. As the respondent-authorities have not adopted such course of action, and resorted to disconnection of power supply and removal of meter, their acts and actions are illegal, arbitrary, violative of principles of natural justice and unsustainable.

12. In the aforesaid view of the matter, the writ petition is allowed. The respondents 3 to 6 shall take necessary steps for release / reconnection of power supply to the first petitioner –Trust, as expeditiously as possible, within a period of seven days, by installing new meter, if it is so required. Needless to observe that on reconnection of power supply, C.C.Charges shall be paid, without default.

13. This Order, however, would not preclude the concerned authorities to take necessary action, in accordance with the Law, in the event, they intend to initiate any action with reference to the service connection No.4611133000468.

14. The writ petition is accordingly allowed as indicated above. No costs.

Consequently, all pending applications shall stand closed.