IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION (L) NO.2450 OF 2008 M/s. Ambika Metal Corporation Through Mr. Ashok Shankar Chowgule .. Petitioner Vs. Maharashtra State Electricity Distribution Company Limited. ..Respondent Ms. Anita Bhaktawani for the petitioner. Ms. A.R.S. Baxi for the respondent. CORAM : SWATANTER KUMAR, C.J. & DR. D.Y. CHANDRACHUD, J. DATED : 6TH JANUARY, 2009 P.C. The present petitioner had filed a writ petition, being Writ Petition No.2901 of 2006, earlier in this court praying for somewhat similar reliefs. That writ petition came to be dismissed whereupon the petitioner had filed a review petition being Review Petition No.54 of 2007, which was also dismissed vide order dated 1st February, 2008. In that order, liberty was granted to the applicant to apply to the respondent for reconnection/fresh connection in accordance with law. On 29th August, 2008, the petitioner moved an application to the Executive Engineer of the Maharashtra State Electricity Distribution Company Limited, Mumbai which has not been replied till date. The petitioner has neither been granted connection nor has he been declined the same. However, in the reply filed before this court, it is stated that the petitioner is liable to pay certain charges and keeping in view the fact that there is a theft case, some other requirements have to be satisfied by the petitioner in terms of Rule 7.2 of the Regulations of 2005. If that be so, it was expected of the respondent to communicate to the petitioner in response to his request and pass appropriate orders on the application preferred by the petitioner on 29th August, 2008. 2. The learned counsel appearing for the respondent states that they would pass appropriate order and communicate the same to the petitioner. In view of the statement made and the facts and circumstances, writ petition does not survive and is accordingly, disposed of. Respondent shall abide by the statement. CHIEF JUSTICE DR. D.Y. CHANDRACHUD, J.