APHC010532612023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3209] TUESDAY, THE TWENTY SEVENTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA WRIT PETITION NO: 28275/2023 Between: 1. CHERUKURI CHANDRA SEKHAR @ CHANDRA, S/O LATE C CHENGALRAYULU, AGED ABOUT 48 YRS, OCC. ADVOCATE, R/O. D NO. 11-158/1-1, MUTTU NAGAR, TIRUCHANOOR, TIRUPATHI- 517 503. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE SOUTHERN POWER DISTRIBUTION COMPANY OF AP LTD, REP BY ITS CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR, H.NO.19-13- 65/A, TIRUCHANUR ROAD, KESAVAYANIGUNTA, TIRUPATI DISTRICT. 2. THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER OPERATIONS APSPDCL, OFFICE SITUATE AT BEHIND SRINIVASA KALYAN MANDAPAM, RAGHAVENDRA NAGAR, TIRUPATHI 3. THE ASSISTANT ENGINEER OPERATIONS, APSPDCL, OFFICE SITUATE AT THOLAPPA GARDEN, TIRUCHANOOR, TIRUPATI DISTRICT. 4. P K NAGAIAH PILLAI NAGARAJU PILLAI, S/O LATE DORASWAMY PILLAI, AGED ABOUT 55 YRS, OCC. BUSINESS,R/O. D. NO. 5-107, VEPAMANU STREET,TIRUCHANOOR-517 503, TIRUPATI DISTRICT. 5. R MUNIRAMAIAH, S/O LATE R CHINNABBA, AGED 55 YRS, OCC. BUSINESS,R/O. D. NO. 19-7-87/K5, YELLAPPA REDDY QUARTERS, RC ROAD, TIRUPATI-517501. ...RESPONDENT(S): NJS,J W.P No.28275 of 2023 2 Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. V VENKATA MAYUR Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. V R REDDY KOVVURI(SC FOR APSPDCL) 2. Venkata Rama Rao Kota SC FOR APSPDCL 3. O UDAYA KUMAR 4. P JAGADISH CHANDRA PRASAD 5. NJS,J W.P No.28275 of 2023 3 The Court made the following Order: Heard Mr. A Veera Reddy, learned arguing counsel. Also heard Mr. K Ashok, learned arguing counsel for DISCOM, Mr. Chetan, learned counsel representing on behalf of the respondent No.4 and Ms. T Priyanka, learned counsel representing on behalf of the learned counsel for the respondent No.5. 2. The case of the petitioner is that he succeeded to the property i.e., house bearing No.1-94 situate in Survey No.418/2 of Trichanoor Grampanchayat, Jogula Colony by way of intestate succession and he is availing electricity supply from the respondent-DISCOM. His further case is that as he was forcibly dispossessed from the said house by the unofficial respondent No.4 and sold it to respondent No.5 illegally, a suit in O.S No.777 of 2023 was filed and the same is pending adjudication before the IV Additional Junior Civil Judge, Tirupati. Pending suit, an order of injunction dated 13.09.2023 restraining the respondents/defendants therein in anyway alienating or creating charge over the suit schedule property to any third party was granted in his favour. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner made a representation dated 26.09.2023 to the respondent Nos.2 and 3 through registered post, requesting them to re-fix the electricity meters to the said house bearing Door No.1-94, Jogula Colony, and not to give new connection to the respondent Nos.4 and 5, as the civil litigation is pending adjudication before the competent Court. He submits that as no action was taken by the respondent Nos.2 and 3 on the said representation, the petitioner is constrained to approach this Court. 4. Mr. K Ashok, learned arguing counsel for DISCOM, while drawing the attention of this Court to the counter-affidavit filed by the respondent Nos.1 to 3, made submissions to the effect that when the concerned authorities made field inspection pursuant to the above referred representation, the petitioner NJS,J W.P No.28275 of 2023 4 and the unofficial respondents are raising objections and under the said circumstances, no further action was taken. He also submits that apart from the three (3) service connections referred to in the petitioner’s representation, there is another service connection bearing No.5522300005569 in the name of the petitioner with regard to which no reference is made in the writ petition. Be that as it may. 5. The learned counsel submits that the petitioner has an effective alternative remedy i.e., the petitioner can approach the Consumer Grievance Redressal Forum. He, however, submits that no orders have been passed on the petitioner’s representation dated 26.09.2023. 6. In the light of the submissions made, this Court is of the view that instead of keeping the writ petition pending, it is deemed appropriate to dispose of the same, leaving it open to the respondent authorities to pass appropriate orders on the petitioner’s representation dated 26.09.2023, as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of four (04) weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order and communicate the same to all the concerned under proper acknowledgment. 7. With the above directions, this Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs. Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. __________________________ JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA Date:27.01.2026 Ksj