APHC010028822025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE SIXTEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA WRIT PETITION No.1499 OF 2025 Between: Kothanur Manjunath, S/o Late K.Chiranjeevi, Aged 45 yrs, R/o 2nd Lane, 3rd Cross, Near Brahmashri School, Seshappa Thota, Madanapalle, Chittoor (Annamayya) District. ...Petitioner AND 1. The State of A.P., rep. by its PrI. Secretary, Energy Infrastructure Dept., Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravathi, Guntur District, and others. ...Respondents Counsel for the Petitioner : Mr.Guttapalem Vijaya Kumar Counsel for the Respondents: Mr.Venkata Rama Rao Kota, Standing Counsel for APSPDCL G.P. for Energy G.P. for Revenue 2 WP_1499_2025 The Court made the following ORDER: Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr.Venkata Rama Rao Kota, learned Standing Counsel for the A.P.S.P.D.C.L. 2. The present writ petition is filed challenging the latter dated 08.1.2025 calling upon the petitioner to submit certain documents, the details of which are mentioned therein. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner while referring to the averments made in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition with reference to the filing of the earlier writ petitions by the petitioner, in particular Writ Petition No.25598 of 2023 questioning the action of the Municipal Authorities in not taking action against the illegal construction by an Ex-Municipal Chairman as also the Contempt Case filed against the Municipality for not implementing the orders passed in the said writ petition, submits that in view of the said cases, the Ex-Municipal Chairman prevailed over the Municipal Commissioner and got issued the letter dated 08.1.2025. He also submits that though the petitioner submitted explanation/reply on 17.1.2025 to the letter dated 08.1.2025, as the respondent Authorities are bent upon to disconnect the power supply to the subject matter Service Connections, the petitioner is constrained to file the present writ petition. 4. He submits that as per the submissions made on behalf of the learned Standing Counsel on earlier occasion, that the respondent Authorities are not going to disconnect the power supply to the subject matter Service Connections, there is no disruption to the power supply. He also fairly submits that the said Ex-Municipal Chairman died after filing of the present writ petition. 3 WP_1499_2025 5. The learned Standing Counsel, on the other hand, submits that the writ petition is not maintainable as the petitioner has a remedy under Section 42(5) of the Electricity Act, 2003. He submits that the petitioner can as well approach the Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum and the writ petition against the letter dated 08.1.2025, which is in fact a notice calling upon the petitioner to furnish certain documents, is not maintainable. He also confirms that during the pendency of the writ petition, the power supply to the subject matter Service Connections is being continued. 6. This Court has considered the submissions made and perused the material on record. 7. At the outset, it may be appropriate to note that in view of the Municipal Commissioner’s letter dated 17.12.2024, it appears that the letter impugned in the present writ petition has been addressed to the petitioner. As submitted by the learned Standing Counsel, it is in fact a notice calling upon the petitioner to submit relevant information/ certificates obtained from the Madanapalle Municipality for securing electricity service connection etc. The wording in the notice/letter reads as if the respondent Authority/ respondent No.4 is determined to cancel the Service Connections even before the relevant information/documents are furnished by the petitioner. Though such type of notices cannot be appreciated, as it is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that reply dated 17.1.2025 to the impugned letter/notice was already been submitted, this Court deems it not necessary to examine the matter further in detail, more particularly with reference to the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the notice was issued at the behest of the Ex-Municipal Chairman, who is now no more. If the petitioner is having the relevant information/documents, which supports the release of the Service Connections, as per the procedure in vogue, 4 WP_1499_2025 the Authorities are bound to take them into consideration, instead of taking any adverse action in this matter. 8. Therefore, the writ petition is disposed of, leaving it open to the petitioner to submit additional reply along with the supporting material, if any, to the respondent No.4, within a period of three (3) weeks from today. On receipt of the same, the respondent No.4 shall also take into consideration the earlier reply dated 17.1.2025 and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, within a period of four (4) weeks from the date of receipt of the additional reply and communicate the same to the petitioner, under proper acknowledgement. 9. Till appropriate orders are passed, no coercive action including disconnection of power supply to the subject matter Service Connections shall be resorted to. There shall be no order as to costs. Miscellaneous petition pending, if any, shall stand closed. ____________________ NINALA JAYASURYA,J February 16, 2026 vasu