THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA & THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE G. KRISHNA MOHAN REDDY WRIT PETITIONS NO :31724, 31725, 31726, 31727, 31729 & 31751 OF 2011 Dated: 1.12.2011 Between: M/S. Kodanda Rama Modern Rice Mill rep., by its Proprietor B. Ayyappa Rao and others. ..Petitioners And 1. The Superintending Engineer (Operation), Eastern Power Distribution Company A.P. Limited, Srikakulam and others. ..Respondents This Court made the following: THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA & THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE G. KRISHNA MOHAN REDDY WRIT PETITIONS NO :31724, 31725, 31726, 31727, 31729 & 31751 OF 2011 COMMON ORDER: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice N.V. Ramana) All these writ petitions are filed challenging the orders dated 10.02.2009 in C.D.Nos.153, 154 of 2006, 1, 2, 5 and 13 of 2007 on the file of District Forum, Srikakulam, and also the orders dated 4.7.2011 in FCA No.441, 442, 443, 444, 445 and 446 of 2009 on the file of the A.P. State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Hyderabad. Since the issue involved in these writ petitions is one and the same, all these writ petitions are being disposed of by this common order. The brief facts of the case are as follows: The writ petitioners are rice mill owners and they are running their mills by utilizing electricity supply on payment of electricity charges. While so, the respondents introduced a scheme known as’24 hour un-interrupted power supply scheme’ in the year 2005, under which, they agreed to lay separate supply lines for giving 24 hours power supply. The petitioners agreed to consume particular units for a period of six months and they also paid the amounts for laying separate lines for them. The respondent-Corporation could not supply power un-interruptedly and therefore, the petitioners could not have consumed the agreed units. The grievance of the petitioners is that as per the contract between them, if the Corporation fails to supply 24 hours power supply uninterruptedly, the petitioners will not have the obligation to consume the agreed units of power for the agreed period of six months. But the respondent-Corporation issued notice to the petitioners stating that at the request of the petitioners, 24 hours un- interrupted power supply scheme was extended and they did not avail the consumption of agreed units and therefore, they have to pay the estimated cost for the balance of the estimated charges for the agreed quantity of Units. Challenging the same, the petitioners approached the District Consumer Forum, Srikakulam. The District Consumer Forum having gone into the merits of the matter and having observed that the petitioners do not fall within the definition of ‘consumer’ as defined under the Consumer Protection Act, dismissed the CDs. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioners preferred the above appeals before the State Commission and the State Commission confirmed the orders of the District Consumer Forum. Hence, the present writ petitions have been filed. Heard both the Counsel and perused the material available on record. The learned Counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners would come within the definition of ‘consumer’, but having regard to the findings recorded by the District Forum, as confirmed by the State Commission in appeal that the petitioners do not come within the definition of ‘consumer’ and as such, the complaints filed by them are not maintainable, the petitioners would like to approach the competent civil Court and avail the remedies available to them under law. He further submitted that the civil Court be directed to dispose of the suit that may be filed by the petitioners without being influenced by any of the findings and observations recorded by the District Forum, as confirmed by the State Commission in appeal, and that till the petitioners approach the competent civil Court seeking appropriate reliefs, the respondent-Corporation be directed not to disconnect power supply to the petitioners. The learned Counsel for the respondent expressed no objection to the stand taken by the petitioners. In view of the agreed stand taken by both the parties, we deem it appropriate to dispose of the writ petitions with the following directions: The petitioners are at liberty to approach the competent civil Court and avail the remedies available to them under law. If the petitioners file suits, the civil Court concerned shall consider and dispose of them on their own merits uninfluenced by any of the findings and observations recorded by the District Forum, as confirmed by the State Commission in appeal. Since the petitioners were enjoying electricity supply continuously during the pendency of the proceedings before the District Forum, State Commission and during the pendency of this writ petition, to protect their interest, we direct that for a period of eight weeks from day, the respondent-Corporation shall not disconnect power supply to the petitioners. Accordingly, the writ petitions are disposed of. No costs. _______________ N.V.RAMANA, J _____________________________ G. KRISHNA MOHAN REDDY, J Dated: 1.12.2011 Nn THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA & THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE G. KRISHNA MOHAN REDDY WRIT PETITIONS NO :31724, 31725, 31726, 31727, 31729 & 31751 OF 2011 (Common Order delivered by the Hon’ble Sri Justice N.V. Ramana) 1.12.2011 Nn