IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE FIFTH DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION NO: 35612 OF 2013 Between: 1. Balusu Sridevi, W/o. Srinivasa Rao, Occ: Cultivation, R/o. Door No.1- 31, Jogannapalem village, Denduluru Mandal, West Godavari District. 2. Balusu Satyavathi, W/o. Pitchaiah, Occ: Cultivation, R/o. Monduru village, Pedavegi Mandal, West Godavari District. 3. Nunna Mounika @ Anumolu Mounika, W/o. Leela Krishna Chowdary, Occ: Cultivation, R/o. Bandanicherla Village, T.Nasarapu, West Godavari District. 4. Thammineni Venkata Ratnam, S/o. Seetha Ramaiah, Occ: Cultivation, R/o. Sagipadu village, Kamavarapukota Mandal, West Godavari District. ...Petitioners and 1. Eastern Power Distribution Company of Andhra Pradesh, Limited Rep. by its Chairman and Managing Director, Visakhapatnam. 2. Superintending Engineer, Operation Circle, A.P.E.P.D.C.L. Godavari District. jram Manda*, Eluru, West 3. Divisional Electrical Engineer/Operation Division Jangareddigudem, A.P.E.P.D.C.L., West Godavari District. 4. The Assistant Divisional Engineer/Operation/A.P.E.P.D.C.L, Kamavarapukota village and Mandal West Godavari District. 5. Additional Assistant Engineer/Operation, Kamavarapukota village Mandal, A.P.E.P.D.C.L., West Godavari District. 6. Assistant Accounts Officer/ERO/Jangareddigudem, Jangareddigudem Town and Mandal, A.P.E.P.D.C.L., West Godavari District. and ...Respondents Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring the is filed praying one action of respondents in disconnecting electrical power supply to the agricultural service connections of petitioners bearing SC Numbers 192, 45, 163 and 6 respectively of Sagipadu Distribution and converting the said connections from non paying to paying category and raising demand bills, as illegal, irregular, irrational, violative of provisions of the Electricity Act, 2003, rules and regulations framed there under and Offends Articles 14 21 of Constitution of India and consequently direct the extend free electrical service and respondents to power supply by maintaining the petitioners' paying category, by granting necessary approval pursuant to letter dated 27-03-2013 addressed by the 3"'^ respondent to the 2 agricultural service connections under non nd respondent. LA. NO: 1 OF 2013(WPMP. LA. NO: 1 OF 2013(WPMP. NO: 44245 OF 20131 Petition under Section 151 CPC is filed praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the respondents to restore electrical supply to the agricultural service connections of petitioners bearing Numbers 192, 45, 163 and 6 respectively of Sagipadu Distribution. Counsel for the PetitionersiSRI. NIMMAGADDA SATYANARAYANA Counsel for the Respondents: P ANAND SESHU (SC FOR APEPDCL) The Court made the following: power SC APHC010665102013 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) SfflS [3331] Si% MONDAY .THE FIFTH DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION NO: 35612/2013 '■*?v Between: Balusu Sridevi, W/o. Srinivasa Rao and Others AND Eastern Power Distribution Company Of Andhra Pradesh ...RESPONDENT(S) and Others Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. NIMMAGADDA SATYANARAYANA Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. P ANAND SESHU, (SC FOR APEPDCL) ...PETITIONER(S) The Court made the following: :: ORDER :: The above writ petition is filed to declare the action of respondent authorities in disconnecting the electrical power supply to the agricultural service connections of the petitioners bearing SC Nos. 192, 45. 163 & 6 respectively of Sagipadu Distribution, is illegal and arbitrary. Today, when the matter is listed, Sri T. Praveen, learned counsel representing Sri Nimmagadda Satyanarayana, learned counsel for the 2. N petitioners would submit that by efflux of time, the cause in the writ petition does not survive for adjudication and the same has become infructuous. 3. Recording the submission made by learned counsel for the petitioner the Writ Petition is dismissed as infructuous. No order as to costs. As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. Sd/- K. TATA RAO deputy registrar //TRUE COPY// v SECTION OFFICER To, 1. OneCCto SRI. NIMMAGADDA SATYANARAYANA Advocate [OPUCJ 2. One CC to SRI. P ANAND SESHU (SC FOR APEPDCL) Advocate [OPUC] 3. Three CD Copies ksr HIGH COURT DATED:05/05/2025 ORDER J 2 9 SEP 2025 , ^ . Current Section ^ WP.No.35612 of 2013 2? ov i- m: DISMISSING THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS AS INFRUCTUOUS