APHC010171012025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3331] WEDNESDAY ,THE SEVENTH DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION NO: 4390/2015 Between: Tetali Venkata Subba Reddy, S/o. Rami Reddy, ...PETITIONER AND The Superintendent Engineer Operations and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. K MURALIDHAR REDDY Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR REVENUE (AP) 2. V V SATISH (SC for APEPDCL) 3. GP FOR FISHERIES (AP) The Court made the following ORDER: Heard Sri K. Muralidhar Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri V.V. Satish, learned standing counsel for APEPDCL, for respondents 1 to 3. 2. Impugning the notice issued by Assistant Engineer (Operations), respondent No.3 vide Lr.No.AE/O/PNMT/F.NO: /D.NO:476/15 dated 20.02.2015, for disconnection of power supply to the service connection of the petitioner, without any orders of respondent No.6, the above writ petition is filed. Page 2 of 4 3. The averments, in brief, are that the petitioner is the absolute owner of land of an extent of Ac.2.72 ½ cents in survey No.422/5, Ac.0-88 cents and Ac.2-63 cents and Ac.0-15 cents in survey No.416/2, 416/3 totaling to Ac.6.38 ½ cents in Brahmanacheruvu village of Penumantra Mandal of West Godavari District. The petitioner made an application for the grant of permission for the conversion of the entire land into fresh aqua culture ponds. The Assistant Executive Officer, Irrigation Section, Penumantra and other officials inspected the lands and recommended for conversion of the petitioner’s land in survey Nos.422/5, 416/2 and 416/3. The petitioner dug the tank and has been raising fish. The electricity department released power supply vide service connection No.735/7103. 4. Be that as it may, the Assistant Engineer, respondent No.3, issued notice impugned in the writ petition and later disconnected the power supply. 5. An interim order was passed on 26.02.2015, directing the petitioner to make a representation to the respondents for the restoration of power supply and directing respondent No.3 to restore the power connection to the petitioner's service connection immediately, if such a representation is made. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that, in pursuance of the interim order, the respondent authorities restored power supply to the petitioner’s service connection. He would also submit that thereafter, the competent authority regularised the existing freshwater tanks and issued proceedings in June 2020. 7. A copy of the said proceedings concerning the regularisation is placed before this Court. 8. Thus, as seen from the developments, pending the writ petition, the power has been restored to the petitioner’s subject property, and the petitioner has been enjoying the power. The respondent authorities are also not disputing the same. In fact, the tank was also regularised by the concerned authorities. 9. Given the above facts and circumstances of the case, due to the restoration of power supply, no further adjudication is required in this writ petition. Hence, this writ petition is closed. No costs. As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. ___________________________ JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI Date: 07.05.2025 IKN 300 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION NO: 4390 of 2015 Date: 07.05.2025 IKN