1 APHC010000432016 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3328] THURSDAY,THE EIGHTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE GANNAMANENI RAMAKRISHNA PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO: 10104/2016 Between: 1. GANTA KOTESWARA RAO, S/O. LATE VENKATESWARA RAO, AGED 60 YEARS, OCC: CULTIVATION, R/O. CHURCH ROAD, SWARNA, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. ANDHRA PRADESH SOUTHERN POWER DISTRIBUTION COMPANY LIMITED, REP. BY ITS CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR,TIRUPATHI, CHITTOOR DISTRICT. 2. SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER, ANDHRA PRADESH SOUTHERN POWER-DISTRIBUTION COMPANY LIMITED ONGOLE, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. 3. ASSISTANT DIVISIONAL ENGINEER, (OSD), ANDHRA PRADESH SOUTHERN POWER-DISTRIBUTION COMPANY LIMITED, PARCHUR, PRAKASAM DISTRICT 4. ASSISTANT ENGINEER OPERATIONS, ANDHRA PRADESH SOUTHERN POWER-DISTRIBUTION COMPANY LIMITED KARAMCHEDU, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. 5. ASSISTANT ACCOUNTS OFFICER/ERO, ANDHRA PRADESH, CHIRALA, PRAKASAM DISTRICT ...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. NIMMAGADDA SATYANARAYANA Counsel for the Respondent(S): 2 1. V.V. SATHISH (APEPDCL) The Court made the following: ORAL ORDER: There is no representation on behalf of the Writ Petitioner. 2. Heard Sri Y. Nagendra, learned Counsel representing Sri V.V. Sathish, learned Standing Counsel for APEPDCL. 3. The Writ Petitioner has challenged the disconnection of his power supply and also the Provisional Assessment Notice dated 19.03.2016 (Ex.P.1). The relevant portion of the impugned Notice is usefully extracted hereunder: <2. Incriminating Points observed: At the time of inspection, it is observed that the consumer removed the insultation of the service wire both phase and neutral before the matter in coming and connected the blue color copper wire with service wire joints and the second side terminals of the blue color connected wire was connected to the entire load of the house. Due to this mechanism the meter was by passed. So the consumer involved in theft of energy case. Theft of energy case is booked.= 4. This Court had granted a conditional Interim Order on 28.03.2016 to pay 1/3rd of Rs.1,52,128/-. The Docket Order would also indicate that on 12.04.2016, it is reported that the Interim Order has been complied with by the Writ Petitioner by payment of 1/3rd of the amount demanded. 5. Having regard to the facts of the case and also the fact that this Writ Petition has been pending on the file of the Court since the year 2016, this Court is inclined to consider the facts of this case in the absence of the Writ Petitioner. 6. The above extract of the impugned Notice dated 19.03.2016 would clearly indicate that the Writ Petitioner has resorted to an act of theft. The manner in which the Writ Petitioner has resorted to commit theft of electricity is also described in the above extract. In this view of the matter, this Court is 3 of the opinion that the present Writ Petition is devoid of any merit. The Writ Petitioner shall now pay the balance amount within a period of eight (8) weeks from the date of uploading of this Order on the website of this Court. 7. With these observations, this Writ Petition is dismissed as being devoid of any merit. No order as to costs. 8. Interlocutory Applications, if any, stand closed in terms of this order. ______________________________________ GANNAMANENI RAMAKRISHNA PRASAD, J Dt:08.01.2026 Vns