4/^ IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESHirAMARAVATIlC^ ii Vi-,';':- THURSDAY, THE SIXTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE DHIRAJ SINGH THAKUR, CHIEF JUSTICE •A f AND THE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO WRIT APPEAL NO: 42 OF 2025 Writ Appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent preferred against the order Dt.04.10.2024 in WP No.22586 of 2024 on the file of the High Court. Between: Awa Venkata Prakash, S/o. Late Eswaraiah. Age 53 Years Business, R/o. Pathakota. Venkatagiri, Tirupati District. ...APPELLANT AND The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Special Chief Secretary Energy Department, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravathi, Guntur District. The Southern Power Distribution Company of Andhra Pradesh, by its Chairman, Tirupati, Tirupati District. The Deputy Executive Engineer, Operation, APSPDCL Palakendram, Venkatagiri, Tirupati District. The Assistant Engineer, Operation, APSPDCL, Chinthagunta Venkatagiri Town, Tirupati District. Veeraraghavapuram Venkata Krishna Reddy, S/o Late Rama Chandra Reddy, Age 75 years, Occ Business, R/o Venkatagiri Town, SPSR Nellore District 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. ...RESPONDENTS lA NO: 1 OF 2025 ‘ Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, the High Court may be pleased to dispense the filing of certified copy in order dated 04.10.2024passed in W.P. No. 22586 of 2024. lA NO: 2 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, the High Court may be pleased to condone the delay of (57) days in filing the above W.A in WP No.22586 of 2024, dated 04.10.2024 passed by His Lordship otherwise the petitioner will suffer irreparable loss and hardship. lA NO: 3 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, the High Court may be pleased to suspend order Dt. 04.10.2024 in WP No.22586 of 2024 passed by learned single judge until further orders. Counsel for the Appellant: SRI JADA SRAVAN KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent No.1: GP FOR ENERGY Counsel for the Respondents No.2 to 4: MR. VENKATA RAMA RAO KOTA(SC FOR APSPDCL) Counsel for the Respondent No.5: Mrs. V SANTHISREE The Court made the following: ORDER Bench Sr.No:-3 [3446] APHC010603082024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI Bv WRIT APPEAL NO: 42 of 2025 ...Appellant Avva Venkata Prakash Vs. ...Respondents The State of Andhra Pradesh and others ie-kie-k-kickicicit Mr. Jada Sravan Kumar Mr. Venkata Rama Rao Kota (SC for APSPDCL) for R.2 to R.4 Mrs. V Santhisree for R.5 Advocate for Appellant Advocate(s) for Respondent(s); CORAM :THE CHIEF JUSTICE DHIRAJ SINGH THAKUR SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO : 6'" March, 2025 DATE P C : The genesis of the present appeal lies in an order passed in WP.No.21652 of 2024 when the petitioner in the said petition challenged the action of the official respondents in trying to disconnect the power connection granted to him. 1. It was during the proceedings in the said petition that a statement appears to have been made by the learned Standing Counsel for Andhra Pradesh Southern Power Distribution Company Limited [APSPDCL] that they not contemplating to disconnect the power supply and if at all necessary that they would follow due process of law. were 2 HG&RRRJ WA 42 2025 It was in those circumstances that the said writ petition was 2. disposed of at the admission stage with a direction to respondent Nos.2 to 4 in the said petition that it at all they intend to disconnect the electricity service connection of the petitioner they should follow the due process of law. It appears that the said order was not communicated by the learned Standing Counsel for APSPDCL and in ignorance, the power connection of the petitioner was disconnected. It was in those circumstancesthat WP.No.22586of 2024 came to 3. be filed. Learned Standing Counsel for APSPDCL fairly made a statement that the order passed in WP.No.21652 of 2024 was not communicated to the authorities and also that the power supply would be restored pursuant to the orders passed on 27.09.2024 in the aforesaid writ petition. Considering those facts, W.P.No.22586 of 2024 was disposed of with a direction to restore the supply of electricity to the petitioner by virtue of the order, dated 04.10.2024. The present writ appeal has been preferred against the judgment and order, dated 04.10.2024 passed in WP.No.22586 of 2024. 4. It is stated that the decision was rendered by the learned single Judge at the admission stage without even issuing notice to the appellant even when the appellant was a party respondent in the writ petition. 5. 3 Ha & RRRJ WA 42 2025 In our opinion, the judgment and order, which is challenged in the present writ appeal, calls for no interference as the same is based upon an earlier statement made in the earlier writ petition bearing WP.No.21652 of 2024 and any action of the official respondents in disconnecting the electric connection would otherwise constitute contempt. The direction so passed is 6. only with a view to reiterate the view expressed by the learned single Judge in the earlier writ petition bearing No.21652 of 2024. Be that as it may, we do not find any merit in the present Writ 7. Appeal, which is accordingly dismissed. No order as to costs. Miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. Sd/- K TATA RAO DEPUTY REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// ^SECTION OFFICER To, 1. One CC to SRI JADA SRAVAN KUMAR, Advocate [OPUC] 2. Two CCs to GP FOR ENERGY, High Court of Andhra Pradesh [OUT] 3. One CC to MR. VENKATA RAMA RAO KOTA, Advocate (SC FOR APSPDCL) [OPUC] 4. One CC to Mrs. V. SANTHISREE, Advocate [OPUC] 5. Three C.D. Copies nm T HIGH COURT DATED:06/03/2025 ORDER WA.No.42 of 2025 DISMISING THE WA WITHOUT COSTS