IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND FOUR PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 23485 of 2004 Between: Sri.K.Ashok S/o.Satyanaryana H.No.6-77mPeruru(V), Amalapuram (M), East Godavari Dist. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 A.P.Transco Chairman-cum-Managing Director Vidyuth Sowdha Somajiguda, Hyderabad. 2 Transoc (Operation) Superintending Engineer A.P., Rajahmundry, East Godavari Dist. 3 The Divisional Engineer A.P., Transco (Operation), Amalapuram, East Godavari Dist. 4 A.P.Transco (OPeration) Additional Divisional Engineer Amalapuram, East Godavari Dist. 5 A.P.Transco (Operation Sub-Division) Amalapuram, East Godavari Dist. .....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 issue a writ, order or direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, or any other appropriate writ, declaring the action of the Respondents directing the respondent uniform power supply to the 18 wards of Peruru village, Amalapuram Mandal, East Godavari Dist, and also direct to bring the entire village i.e., 18 wards, into control of one Single A.P. either Town A.E. or Rural A.E., and consequently direct the respondent to produced the file No.DNODEE KOP 185/1991, dt 03-05-1991 and pass such other order and orders. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.K.GANI REDDY Counsel for the Respondents: MR.KANAKAMEDALA RAVINDRA KUMAR The Court, at the stage of admission, made the following: ORDER: Petitioner is an Advocate practicing at Amalapuram. He claims to have submitted a representation, dated 30.10.2004, to the respondents herein pointing out certain anomalies in the distribution of the power and with reference to the load bearing capacity of the transformers in different parts of the same Village. He complains that no action has been taken on his representation, and alleges that the consumers of one part of the Village are put to severe hardship, on account of the difference in the nature of supply. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned standing counsel for the respondents. The respondents are vested with the power as well as duty, to supply the power to various categories of consumers. The nature and quality of supply would depend on several factors. The question as to whether any steps need be taken to ensure uniform supply to the entire Village in question, needs to be considered by the respondents. It is too difficult for this Court to record any finding, in this regard. Once the petitioner had pointed out certain discrepancies as well as grievances, the respondents are under obligation to examine the same and take appropriate measures. Hence, the writ petition is disposed of directing the 2nd respondent to pass appropriate orders and take necessary measures, as are permissible within the framework of law, based on the representation of the petitioner, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. There shall be no order as to costs. _______________________ L.NARASIMHA REDDY, J Dated : 17th December, 2004 Note: Office to furnish copy In three days. (B/o.) Ts To 1 A.P.Transco Chairman-cum-Managing Director Vidyuth Sowdha Somajiguda, Hyderabad. 2 Transoc (Operation) Superintending Engineer A.P., Rajahmundry, East Godavari Dist. 3 The Divisional Engineer A.P., Transco (Operation), Amalapuram, East Godavari Dist. 4 A.P.Transco (OPeration) Additional Divisional Engineer Amalapuram, East Godavari Dist. 5 A.P.Transco (Operation Sub-Division) Amalapuram, East Godavari Dist. 6 Two C.D. copies.