The Hon'ble Sri Justice C.V.Nagarjuna Reddy Writ Petition No.31185 of 2011 Date: 30-11-2011 Between: Manti Seetharamaswamy ..... Petitioner AND The Superintending Engineer, APEPDCL, Eluru, West Godavari District and another. .....Respondents Counsel for the Petitioner: Sri B.Chandrasekhar Counsel for the Respondents: Smt.G.Jyothi Eswar, SC for APEPDCL The Court made the following : Order: The petitioner is availing two agricultural service connections, which stand in the name of his father and sister respectively, both of whom have died. On 17-11- 2011, respondent No.2 disconnected the power supply to both the service connections without prior notice. Feeling aggrieved by this action, the petitioner filed the present Writ Petition. Smt.G.Jyothi Eswar, learned Standing Counsel for Andhra Pradesh Eastern Power Distribution Company Limited (for short ‘APEPDCL’), representing the respondents, on instructions, submitted that, since the petitioner did not get the service connections transferred in his name and has been using the power supply in the name of the dead persons, the power supply to those service Connections was disconnected. She, candidly, conceded that, before disconnecting power supply, the respondents ought to have issued a notice to the petitioner. The respondents do not appear to dispute the petitioner’s status as the legal heir of the registered consumers. Transfer of service connection in his name, therefore, appears to be a requirement, which the petitioner failed to comply with. Before resorting to the extreme action of disconnecting the power supply, respondent No.2 ought to have given the petitioner an opportunity of getting the service connections transferred in his name in the place of the deceased registered consumers. As this procedure is not followed, the respondents are directed to restore power supply to the two agricultural service connections. The petitioner shall approach respondent No.2 with appropriate application for transferring the service connections in his name, within a period of one month from today. If such an application is received, respondent No.2 shall consider and take appropriate action thereon. If the petitioner fails to make any such application, respondent No.2 shall be free to issue notice to the petitioner and take appropriate action in accordance with the general terms and conditions of power supply. The Writ Petition is, accordingly, allowed to the extent indicated above. As a sequel, WPMP.No.38695 of 2011, filed by the petitioner for interim relief, is disposed of. ______________________ (C.V.Nagarjuna Reddy, J) 30th November, 2011 LUR