IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD THURSDAY THE TWENTYEIGHTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TEN PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE T. MEENA KUMARI AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR WRIT APPEAL No. 3 9 1 OF 2004 Between: Sri Srinivasa Rice & Flour Mill, Represented by its Managing Partner, S. Yoganandam, D.No. 3-27, Atchampeta, Atchampeta Revenue Mandal, Guntur district & Another. …. Appellants V/s. The Superintending Engineer, AP Transco Operation Circle, 4th Line, Brodipet, Guntur, Guntur district & 5-Ors. …. Respondents Counsel for the Appellants: Sri Vasireddy Prabhunath Counsel for the Respondents: Sri O. Manohar Reddy (SC for A.P.Transco) THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE T. MEENA KUMARI AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR WRIT APPEAL No. 3 9 1 OF 2004 J U D G M E N T : (Per the Hon'ble Smt. Justice T. Meenakumari) This writ appeal is directed against order dated 02-1-2004 passed in WP.No. 27384 of 2003 by the learned single Judge, whereby the learned single Judge dismissed the writ petition holding that the compound consumption of energy exceeds more than 75% HP in which event both the connections have to be treated as HT connections. 2. The main writ petition has been filed questioning the impugned proceedings issued by the first respondent through Lr.No. SE/O/GNT/Coml/FMS/D.No.577/03, dated 28-2-2003 as illegal, arbitrary, violative of Articles 14 and 19 of the Constitution of India and set aside the same by directing the respondents to treat the service connections, which are distinct and governed by separate agreements of the petitioners SC.No. 201 and SC.No. 686 are LT category-III with effect from January 1999 and issue the revised consumption charges bills separately for each service connection under L.T. Category-III after making adjustment of the amounts already paid and restore the power supply to them and to pass such other suitable orders as this court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. 3. The facts in brief are as follows: The first petitioner is a partnership firm represented by Sri S. Yoganandam. Whereas the second petitioner is a proprietory concern of Sri S. Yoganandam. Both the petitioners are different entities, availing electricity power supply under SC.Nos. 201 and 686 corresponding to LT Category-III respectively. It is contended before the learned single Judge that they have to be treated as single unit and the respondent-authorities have taken into consideration that both the services are existing in one premises and the ownership of the firms is in the name of one consumer, therefore converted 2 L.T. connections into H.T. connections category. Whereas the learned single Judge has not considered the case of the appellants-writ petitioners but relied upon earlier orders passed by the learned single Judge of this Court in WP.No. 2867 of 2002, which is also filed questioning the billing of the units. 4. The case of the appellants is that even though there are 2- LT connections perhaps there are two separate agreements and they have to be treated as a single unit and they cannot be billed as HT consumer. It is also contended that for the rice mill, the respondent- authorities have requested to make conversion of LT-III (B) category. But however, we do not find any such material that the appellants-writ petitioners have been categorized under LT-III (B) category. 5. Under the above circumstances, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants-writ petitioners sought liberty of this Court to make a fresh representation to the respondent- authorities seeking to consider their request for treating the units under LT-III (B). Accordingly, liberty is granted to the appellants-writ petitioners to make a fresh representation to the respondent- authorities to consider their case under the category LT-III (B) within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and to avail the remedies open to them if any order passed against them. 6. With the above observation, the writ appeal is disposed of. No costs. __________________________ JUSTICE T. MEENA KUMARI ________________________________ JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR 28-01-2010. I s L NB: CC tomorrow B/o. I s L THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE T. MEENA KUMARI AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR WRIT APPEAL No. 3 9 1 OF 2004. Judgment of the Division Bench delivered by the Hon'ble Smt. Justice T. Meenakumari) Circulation Entry No. 8 4 Date: 28-01-2010 COMPUTER No. 43 Court Master: I s L