APHC010022932017 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY,THE SEVENTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE GANNAMANENI RAMAKRISHNA PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO: 25696 OF 2017 Between: 1. Shaik Ameer Jhon,, S/o. Shaik Subhani, Aged about 55 years, Resident of Pedda Masid Bazar, Vinukonda Village and Mandal, Guntur District. ...Petitioner AND 1. The Andhra Pradesh Southern Power Distribution Company, Lt., (APSPDCL), Rep., by its Divisional Engineer (Operations), Narsaraopet, Guntur District. 2. The Assitant Divisional Engineer APSPDCL, Vinukonda, Guntur District. 3. The Assistant Engineer Operations APSPDCL, Vinukonda, Guntur District. 4. The Assistant Accounts Officer ERO APSPDCL, Vinukonda, Guntur District ...Respondents Counsel for the Petitioner: N PRAMOD Counsel for the Respondents: V V SATISH (SC for APEPDCL) Counsel for the Respondents:V R REDDY KOVVURI (SC FOR APCPDCL) 2 The Court made the following ORAL ORDER: None present for the Writ Petitioner. 2. Heard Sri Y. Nagendra, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of Sri V.V. Satish, learned Standing Counsel for APEPDCL. 3. The prayer sought in the present Writ Petition would indicate that the Writ Petitioner had challenged the disconnection of power supply to his Rice Mill. The Docket Sheet would indicate that when the matter was first listed on 02.08.2017, this Court had directed the Respondents to obtain instructions. On 04.08.2017, this Court had recorded that there is no appearance on behalf of the Writ Petitioner. On 23.04.2018, when the matter was again listed, this Court has noticed in the Order that the power connection was restored on 01.08.2017 itself. The relevant portion of the Order dated 23.04.2018 is usefully extracted hereunder: <Learned Standing Counsel for APSPDCL submits that as a matter of fact, power supply has been restored to the petitioner's premises on 01.08.2017 itself. Hence, post after Summer Vacation, 2018. It is, however, made clear that if the submission made on behalf of the respondents turns out to be false, the person, who gave the instructions as well as the individuals involved shall be liable to be prosecuted for making a false statement before this Court, on oath.= 4. The above extract would indicate that the Court had indicated a caution that, if the statement that the power connection is restored on 01.08.2017 itself appears to be incorrect, the concerned Officials would be prosecuted for making a false statement. Despite passage of eight years, nothing has come on record to indicate that the statement of the Official Respondents that the power connection has been restored on 01.08.2017 is incorrect. 5. In this view of the matter, this Court deems that even before this Writ Petition was listed for the first time on 02.08.2017, the power connection of the 3 Rice Mill of the Writ Petitioner was restored on 01.08.2017. Therefore, no cause survives in this Writ Petition. 6. With these observations, this Writ Petition stands disposed of. No order as to costs. 7. Interlocutory Applications, if any, stand closed in terms of this order. ______________________________________ GANNAMANENI RAMAKRISHNA PRASAD, J Dt: 07.01.2026 JKS 4 77 HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GANNAMANENI RAMAKRISHNA PRASAD WRIT PETITION No. 25696 OF 2017 07.01.2026 JKS