APHC010714202014 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE 17th DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 1047 OF 2014 Between: 1. M/S DHANEKULA INSTITUTE OF ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLONGY,, (VJA 3091),ganguru, Vljayawada (M)Krishna Dt Rep.by its Chairman D.Ravindranath Tagore S/ o Venkata Subbaiah age 74 years ...Petitioner AND 1. MD SOUTHERN POWER DISTRIBUTION COMPANY OF AP LTD 2 OTHE, Rep by its Chairman and Managing Director Tirupati,Chitoor Dt 2. The Superintending Engineer Operation, Southern Power Distribution of Company A.P Ltd Viajayawada,krishna District 3. Senior Account Officer Operation, Southern Power Distribution of Company A.P Ltd Viajayawada, Krishna District. ...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 toto issue writ or order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Wirt of Mandamus declaring the inaction of respondents for not acting on petitioners representation dated 10-9-2013 and 11-12-2013 as arbitrary and against the principles of natural justice and affect fundamental rights of the petitioner Article 14 and 19(1),(g) of the constitution of India and also direct 2 the respondents to adjust 50% of the penal charges Rs3,21,7391- paid by the petitioner in future consumption bills as per the directions of APERC in proceedings No .APERC/Secy/154/2013 dated 8-8-2013 and also direct the respondents not to take any coercive steps including disconnection of power supply to the petitions unit and pass such other order or orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. IA NO: 1 OF 2014(WPMP 1194 OF 2014 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 direct the respondents not to take any coercive steps including disconnect the power supply to the petitioner unit for adjusting the amount of 50% in Rs 3,21,7391- in pennal charges paid by the petitioner in future consumption bills. Counsel for the Petitioner: K V UPENDRA GUPTA Counsel for the Respondents: P VINOD KUMAR Counsel for the Respondents:V R REDDY KOVVURI (SC FOR APCPDCL) The Court made the following order: 3 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 1047 OF 2014 ORDER: No representation on behalf of the petitioner. Heard learned Standing Counsel for the respondents. 2. The present Writ Petition is filed seeking to declare the inaction of respondents in not considering the petitioner’s representations dated 10.9.2013 and 11.12.2013 as arbitrary and against the principles of natural justice and also direct the respondents to adjust 50% of the penal charges Rs.3,21,7391/- paid by the petitioner in future consumption bills as per the directions of APERC in proceedings No.APERC/Secy/154/2013, dated 8.8.2013 and also direct the respondents not to take any coercive steps including disconnection of power supply to the petitions unit. 3. It is observed that when the matter is taken up for hearing, at the stage of admission, this Court passed interim orders dated 21.01.2014 directing the respondent Nos. 1 to 3 to adjust 50% penalty amount paid by the petitioner, towards future monthly bills to be payable by the petitioner till the review petition filed by the respondents against the orders dated 08.08.2013 passed by the 4th respondent is disposed. Thereafter, if the review is allowed, then the petitioner has to pay the regular bills. 4. Learned Standing Counsel for the respondents submits that pending the Writ Petition, the petitioner paid the entire amount as directed. 4 As of now there is no pending claim against the petitioner and there is no liability on part of the petitioner in favour of the respondents. He further submits that the service connection of the petitioner is still alive and they have been addressing the CC bills regularly without any default and requested to close the writ petition. 5. In view of the clear and categorical submissions made by the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents, the claim of the petitioner has already been redressed and no further orders are necessary in the present writ petition. 6. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is closed. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed. __________________________________ VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA, J 17.09.2026 BSP 5 75 HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 1047 OF 2014 17.09.2026 BSP