APHC010193032016 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3209] MONDAY,THE NINTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA WRIT PETITION NO: 15702/2016 Between: 1. SRI KARANAM APPA RAO, S/O ADINARAYANA, OCC: PROPRIETOR, SRI VIJAYA LAKSHMI VENKATA MANGATAYARU, OLD GUNNIES BUSINESS, R/O D.NO.11-1-46/1, K.N.ROAD, TADEPALLIGUDEM. 2. KARANAM LOKESH, S/O APPA RAO, HINDU, OCC: BUSINESS, R/O D.NO.11-46/1, K.N.ROAD, TADEPALLIGUDEM. 3. KARANAM NAGAMALI, W/O LOKESH BABU, HINDU, D.NO.11-1-46/1, K.N.ROAD, TADEPALLIGUDEM. ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1. CHAIRMAN MANAGING DIRECTOR, ANDHRA PRADESH EASTERN POWER DISTRIBUTION COMPANY LTD., VISAKHAPATNAM. 2. THE ASSISTANT ENGINEER OPERATION, ANDHRA PRADESH EASTERN POWER DISTRIBUTION COMPANY LTD., TADEPALLIGUDEM (SOUTH), WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT. 2 NJS,J W.P.NO.15702 OF 2016 3. ADDEPALLI RAMULAMMA W/O APPA RAO, HINDU, R/O 20TH WARD, OPP: CPM OFFICE, SEETHARAMPETA, TADEPALLIGUDEM, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT. 4. BUDDIREDDY KOLESHWARA RAO S/O TATA RAO, HINDU, MALE, R/O 20TH WARD, OPP: CPM OFFICE, SEETHARAMPETA, TADEPALLIGUDEM, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT. 5. ADDEPALLI PRASAD S/O APPA RAO, HINDU, OCC: EMPLOYEE, R/O 20TH WARD, OPP: CPM OFFICE, SEETHARAMPETA, TADEPALLIGUDEM, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENT(S): 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 a Writ, Order or direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring the action of the 2nd respondent in issuing the notice Lr.NO.AE/O/TPG South/F.No.Doc/D.NO.156/16, dt.27.4.2016 thereby threatening to disconnection of power supply to in SC.NO.34933 to the petitioners shop premises 11-1-46/1, 2 on the representation of the unofficial respondents during the pendency of the Civil Suit in O>S.NO.341 of 2015 on the file of the Principal Junior Civil Judge, Tadepalligudem as illegal, irregular, arbitrary and also violative of the provisions of the Electricity Act 2003 and rules framed there under and also offends Articles 14 and 21 of Constitution of India and consequently set aside the notice Lr.No.AE/O/TPG South/F.No.Doc/D.NO.156/16, dt.27.4.2016 issued by the 2nd respondent and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2016(WPMP 19412 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 direct the 2nd 3 NJS,J W.P.NO.15702 OF 2016 respondent not to disconnect the power supply to the petitioners shop premises 111-46/1, 2, bearing SC.No.34933 of Tadepalligudem pending disposal of the main Writ Petition, and pass Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. MANGENA SREE RAMA RAO Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. V V SATISH (SC for APEPDCL) The Court made the following: 4 NJS,J W.P.NO.15702 OF 2016 ORDER:- Heard Mr.Mangena Sree Rama Rao, learned counsel for the petitioners and also Ms.Aishwarya Chowdary, learned Junior Standing Counsel for respondent Nos.1 & 2. 2. As seen from the record, it appears that notice was served on the unofficial respondents, however, none entered appearance. Be that as it may. 3. The present writ petition is filed challenging the notice dated 27.04.2016 issued by the 2nd respondent. The said notice is stated to have been issued at the instance of respondent No.5 and others. While referring to certain points stated to have been observed by the 2nd respondent, the details of which are set out in the notice dated 27.04.2016, the petitioners were called upon to submit the relevant information. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners, though sought to make submissions with reference to the averments made in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition and the pendency of the civil suit in O.S.No.340 of 2015, this Court is not inclined to examine the same. Suffice it to say that, in the light of the observations made by the 2nd respondent, a notice dated 27.04.2016 was 5 NJS,J W.P.NO.15702 OF 2016 issued to the petitioners. Instead of submitting a reply, the petitioners filed present writ petition. Whether the petitioners obtained the service connection by submitting the requisite documents is a matter for examination by the concerned officer of the Corporation. 5. Even if the case of the petitioners to the effect that the impugned notice was issued at the behest of the unofficial respondents is appreciable, the petitioners still have an opportunity to satisfy the authorities concerned that the service connection was obtained at their request and upon submission of the relevant documents. 6. Therefore, this Court is inclined to dispose of the writ petition, leaving it open to the petitioners to submit their reply to the notice dated 27.04.2016 within a period of four (4) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Thereafter, the 2nd respondent shall pass appropriate orders, within a period of four (4) weeks from the date of receipt of the said reply, by giving due opportunity of hearing to the petitioners and the unofficial respondents. 6 NJS,J W.P.NO.15702 OF 2016 7. As it is transpired that power supply to service connection No.34933, is being continued, as per the latest instructions dated 07.01.2026 furnished to the learned Standing counsel by the 2nd respondent, the same shall be continued till appropriate orders are passed by the 2nd respondent. 8. With the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. ___________________________ JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA Date: 09.02.2026 LSP