IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION NO : 18392 of 2003 Between: 1 Sathi China Satyanarayana Reddy, S/o. Rama Reddy, Hindu, Business, Proprietor of Sri Satyanarayana Poultry Farm, Dwarapudi Village, Mandapeta Mandal, E.G. District. 2 Chirla Ramanna, S/o. Satyanarayana Reddy, Hindu, Proprietor of Poultry Farm, R/o. Dwarapudi Village, Mandapeta (M), East Godavari District. 3 Chirla Chandra Reddy, S/o. Satyanarayana Reddy, Hindu, Business, Proprietor of Poultry Farm at Dwarapudi Village, Mandapeta (M), East Godavari District. 4 Kovvuri Satyanarayana Reddy, S/o. Eswara Reddy, Hindu, Business, Proprietor of a Poultry farming at Dwarapudi Village, Mandapeta Mandal, E.G. District. ..... PETITIONER(S) AND 1 The A.P. Eastern Power Distribution Company Ltd., Visakhapatnam, Rep. by its 2 The Assistant Divisional Engineer, Operation Sub-Division, Mandapeta (PO) (M), East Godavari District. 3 The Divisional Engineer, Operation Division, Main Road, Ramachandrapuram (PO), E.G. District. 4 The Superintending Engineer, Operation Circle, Vidyut Sakha Bhavan, Godavari Bund, Near: Kumari Talkies, Rajahmundry (PO), East Godavari District. .....RESPONDENT(S) Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to to issue an appropriate order writ or Directions more particularly, one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, by declaring that the impugned Notices dt: 24.11.2000 and 30.05.201 issued by the 1st and 2nd respondents respectively, and the consequent clubbing of the four electrical service connection Nos. 1811, 1812, 1825 and 1840 in respect of poultry farming units of the petitioners at Dwarapudi Village, Mandapeta Mandal, East Godavari District, into a single service under category-III B System without converting the supply system from the existing low tension system and by issuing a single current bill every month against the four poultry units, as arbitrary, illegal, violative of the Terminable, and unsustainable against the petitioners poultry farms at Dwarapudi Village and thus to set aside the same in the interest of justice Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.P.NARASIMHA RAO Counsel for the Respondent No.: . The Court made the following : THE HON’BLE Ms. JUSTICE G. ROHINI WRIT PETITION No. 18392 OF 2003 ORDER: The petitioners herein, four in number, were granted electricity service connections under Low Tension category-III for the purpose of their poultry farm sheds at Dwarapudi. Accordingly, they were being issued separate electricity bills for their respective service connections and the consumption charges were being paid regularly. While so, the first respondent by notice dated 24.11.2000 informed the petitioners that all the four poultry farm units of the petitioners would be treated as single service with an aggregate contracted load of 132.30 HP and the same would be treated under category- III B. Accordingly, the petitioners were directed to make necessary arrangements for conversion into category III-B system. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioners filed W.P.No.2514 of 2001 contending that each poultry shed, being a distinct and separate unit, they cannot be treated as single service under category-III B. The said writ petition was disposed of by this court directing the petitioners to file their objections to the notice, dated 24.11.2000. Pursuant thereto, the petitioners filed their objections opposing the proposed conversion of service connections into category-III B. However, the first respondent rejected the objections raised by the petitioners and passed an order dated 30.05.2001 informing them that it has been decided to treat all the four units as a single establishment in exercise of powers vested under Clause 27 of the Terms and Conditions of Supply and accordingly the writ petitioners were directed to switch over to H.T. supply within three months. Challenging the said order, the present writ petition has been filed. 2. Heard the learned counsel for both parties. 3. It is represented by the learned counsel for the petitioners as well as the learned counsel for the respondents that an identical question was considered by this court in Hemanth Fan Components Vs. Central Power Distribution Co. of A.P. Ltd. Hyderabad and others[1] wherein it was held that to exercise discretion under Clause 27, conditions precedent is that separate establishments should not only be situate within a single premises but should also be owned or leased by same person. It was held by this court that the respondents are required to record reasons which disclose that the discretion in terms of Clause 27 of the Terms and Conditions of Supply is properly exercised. As could be seen from the impugned order, no reasons were assigned by the first respondent while directing the conversion of the service connections of the petitioners into H.T. supply. Thus, it is clear that the first respondent failed to exercise the discretion conferred under Clause 27 of the Terms and Conditions of Supply. 4. In the circumstances following the order of this court in Hemanth Fan Components’ case (Supra), the impugned order is set-aside and the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents to consider the objections raised by the petitioners afresh in the light of the ratio laid down by this court in the above referred case. No order as to costs. ____________ (G. ROHINI, J.) 17th March,2009 Note:C.C. in one week. B/o. Stp ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1) 2 CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{ } [1] 2001 (2) L.S. 186