::1:: APHC010603252024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3329] MONDAY ,THE TWENTIETH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 540/2025 Between: Govada Vamsi Krishna ...PETITIONER AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. JADA SRAVAN KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR ENERGY ::2:: THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 540/2025 This Court made the following ORDER: The instant Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the following relief: “..to issue a Writ Order or direction particularly one in the nature of a writ of Mandamus declaring the inaction of the Respondent No.3 in considering the petitioner’s representation dated 06.03.2024 made to initiate necessary action on removal of the extension of electricity supply to Respondent No.6 from the petitioner’s existing electricity connection/transformer situated in petitioner’s premises as the same is damaging the standing crop as illegal, arbitrary and in violation of the petitioner’s Fundamental Rights under Articles 14, 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India besides being contrary to General Terms and Conditions of Supply of Distribution and Retail Supply Licensees and consequently direct the respondent No.3 to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 06.03.2024 and remove the extension lines from the petitioner’s existing transformer and to pass..” 2. The claim of the Petitioner in the Writ Petition is that the Respondents are not taking any steps for removal of electricity supply to the Respondent No.6 from the existing transformer from which the Petitioner drawing the power. 3. The further case of the Petitioner is that the Respondent Authorities are trying to draw the service connection in favour of the 6th Respondent from the existing transformer is contrary to the general terms and conditions of General Terms and Conditions of Supply of Distribution and Retail Supply Licensees, ::3:: 2006. Aggrieved, the Petitioner submitted representation dated 06.03.2024 seeking for removal of the said service connection of the 6th Respondent. Even though the representation submitted on 06.03.2024, so far the Respondents neither acted upon nor replied to the representation. 4. On the other hand, learned Standing Counsel furnished written instructions issued by the 3rd and 4th Respondents herein wherein it is stated that there is no extended electrical lines in favour of the Respondent No.6 from the existing transformer. It is further observed that no electrical power was issued from the transformer situated in the Petitioner’s land to the 6th Respondent. 5. In view of clear and categorical denial of the claim of the Petitioner and pursuant to the written instructions by the 3rd and 4th Respondents, there is no further cause for adjudication in this matter. 6. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is closed. As a sequel, interlocutory applications if any pending, shall stand closed. ______________________________________ JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA Dt:20.01.2025 krk ::4:: THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 540/2025 Dt:20.01.2025 krk