IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AM (Special Original Jurisdiction) | THURSDAY ,THE FIRST DAY OF MAY 1 TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SAfff^ WRIT PETITION NO: 36563 OF 2016 Between: Janakirama Aqua Farms Private Limited, rep.by its Managing Director, Indukuri Prasada Rama Mohana Raju, S/oJanakirama Raju, aged about 57 years, Occ:Agri.business, Flat No.203, Lotus Ornet, Opp.Matha General Stores, ASR Nagar, Bhimavaram, West Godavari District. ...PETITIONER AND 1. A.P.Southern Power Distribution Company Limited, Office at Door No. 19-13-65/A, Srinivasa Puram, Thiruchanoor Road, Tirupathi, Chittoor district, rep.by its Managing Director, 2. The Assistant Accounts Officer, ERO, APSPDCEL, Pedana Post & Mapdal, Krishna District. 3. Assistant Divisional Engineer(Operations), APSPDCL, Pedana Post & Mandal, Krishna District. 4. The Secretary, A.P.Electricity Regulatory Commission, (APERC), Singareni Bhavan, Read hills Road, Lakadikapool, Hyderabad ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a writ or order or direction more fully in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring that the Action of the the 2nd F.ACB/ for payment of Additional Consumption Deposit of Rs. 92,690/- as illegal, arbitrary, ultra-vires and violative of Rule 4(1) and Rule 6(1) and 6(2) of A.P. Electricity respondents in issuing the impugned Notice issued by respondent in his proceedings Lr.No. AAO/ERO/PEDANA/ D.No.43/2015 dated 23-05-2016 Regulatory Commison (Security Deposit) Regulation 2004 and consequently set aside the same I.A. NO: 1 OF 2016rWPMP. NO: 45024 OF 2016) Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to suspend the Impugned Notice for payment of additional Consumption Deposit of Rs.92690/-, issued by the 2nd respondent in his proceedings Lr.No. AAO/ ERO/ PEDANA/ F.ACB/D.No.43/2015, dated 23-05-2016. Counsel for the Petitioner(s):SRI. SAJJA SRIRAMASURYAM Counsel for the Respondents: VENKATA RAMA RAO (SC FORAPSPDCL) The Court made the following ORDER: APHC010643962016 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3331] Sa1-L^ THURSDAY ,THE FIRST DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION NO: 36563/2016 THE Between: Janakirama Aqua Farms Private Limited AND nicfrihi itinn .rnmnanv Limited and ...PETITIONER ...RESPONDENT(S) r' OUULIICMI ! WVVOI Others Counsel for the Petitioner; 1.SAJJA SRIRAMASURYAM Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.SRINIVASA RAO PUTLURl 2.V R REDDY KOWURl (SC FOR APCPDCL) 3. JAGARLAMUD1K0TESWAR1DEV1(SC FORAPSPDCL) The Court made the following: ;: ORDER :: 1 No. 2 vide by respondent the notice issued Impugning Lr.No.AAO/ERO/PEDANA/f.acb/d.No.43/2015, dated 23.05.2016, for payment of additional consumption deposit, is illegal and arbitrary and also violative of Rule 4(1), 6(1) and 6(2) of the Andhra Pradesh Electricity Regulatory Commission (Security Deposit) Regulation, 2004, the above writ petition filed. was 2. An interim order was passed on 27.10.2016, directing the respondents not to disconnect the power connection of the petitioner, subject to deposit of % of the demanded amount, within four (04) weeks. It was further observed that the deposit is without prejudice to the rights and contentions of the petitioner and also subject to the outcome of the writ petition. None appeared for the petitioner. Smt. Adarshitha, learned Junior Standing Counsel appearing for respondents 1 to 3 would submit that pending the writ petition, the petitioner paid the entire amount voluntarily. Since the entire amount has been paid, the respondent authorities have not taken any further action, in pursuance of the order impugned in the writ petition. She would also submit that since the amount was paid, the cause in the writ petition does not survive for adjudication. 3. 4. 5. Given the facts and circumstances of the case and since the amount was paid by the petitioner, in pursuance of the aforementioned notice and, the respondent authorities have not taken any further steps for disconnection, the cause doesn’t survive and no further adjudication is required in the writ petition. 6. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is closed. No order as to costs. Miscellaneous petitions, if any pending, in this case, shall stand closed. Sd/- P. VINOD KUMAR ASSISTANT REGISTRAR SECTION OFFICER //TRUE COPY// To, 1. One CC to SRI. SAJJA SRIRAMASURYAM Advocate [OPUC] 2. One CC to SRI. VENKATA RAMA RAO (SC FORAPSPDCL) [OPUC] 3. Three CD Copies psk high court DATED;01/05/2025 ^ 0 MUG 2025^^) _ ys?' ORDER WP.No.36563 of 2016 CLOSING THE WRIT petition with no costs