THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.8658 of 2011 Date:01.04.2011 Between: M/s.Vinayaka Modern Rice Mills, East Godavari District ..... Petitioner AND The Managing Director, A.P.E.P.D.C.L., Visakhapatnam and others .....Respondents Counsel for the Petitioner: Sri T.Lakshmi Kanth Counsel for Respondents: Smt. Jyothi Eswar Gogineni, standing counsel for APEPDCL The Court made the following: ORDER: This writ petition is filed for the following substantive relief: “…..to issue a Writ, Order or Direction(s) particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring that Lr.No.ADE/LSD/SLO/F.Dkt/D.No.355/11, Dated:26-02-2011 of the 3rd Respondent herein served on the Petitioner on 08-03- 2011 is illegal, without jurisdiction and without any authority of law and consequently direct the Respondents herein to treat the Petitioner herein under L.T.III A Category, and pass such other Order or Orders…” At the hearing, the learned counsel for the parties have agreed among them that the issue raised in this writ petition is covered by the common order dated 08.06.2009 passed in W.P.Nos.1037, 1045 and 1083 of 2009, wherein this Court held that before calling upon the consumers to regularise the alleged additional load, a prior notice is necessary. On that premise, the impugned notice was set aside with liberty to the respondents to issue a show-cause notice to the consumer and pass a fresh order after hearing and considering the objections, if any, filed within the stipulated period by the consumer in response to the show-cause notice. Following the said order, this Writ Petition is allowed with liberty to the respondents to pass a fresh order by following the procedure referred in the preceding paragraph. As a sequel to allowing the writ petition, W.P.M.P.No.10756 of 2011 filed by the petitioner for interim relief is disposed of as infructuous. ________________________ C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J 01st April, 2011 GHN