IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE FIRST DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 3981 of 2003 Between: Mohd. Edris S/o. Mohd. Iqbal R/o. H.No. 9-4-62/137, Toli Chowki, Hyderabad ... PETITIONER AND 1 The Managing Director Hyderabad Metropolitan Water Supply & Sewerage Board Central Revenue Department, 6th Floor, Progressive Towers, Hyderabad 2 The Manager Hyderabad Metropolitan Water Supply & Sewerage Board O & M Division, No. III, Toli Chowki Section, Hyderabad ...RESPONDENTS 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 an appropriate, writ, order, or direction in the nature of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in issuing demand notice under Bill No. 990407076 dt. 15-2-2003 for an amount of Rs. 13,324-50 paise towards water consumption charges of Rs. 1437/- for the months of December, 2002 and January, 2003 without taking any matter reading and arrears of Rs. 11,887-50 Paise without mentioning the months for which the petitioner fell in arrears and without mentioning the previous and current reading as being illegal, unjust, arbitrary and violative of Art.14 of the constitution of India and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: Sri E.V.BHAGIRATHA RAO Counsel for the Respondent No.: K.SUDHAKAR REDDY( SC FOR H M W S) The Court made the following : O R D E R : In this Writ Petition the petitioner has questioned the demand notice issued by the Hyderabad Metropolitan Water Supply and Sewerage Board, demanding an amount of Rs.13,324.50 paise towards water cess, sewerage cess, service charges and also arrears to the tune of Rs.11,887.50 paise. The petitioner questioned the impugned demand mainly on the ground that there are no arrears and though the petitioner has been paying the consumption bills of water cess and sewerage cess, respondents have issued the impugned demand notice, without giving particulars, showing an amount of Rs.11,887.50 paise as arrears. It is submitted that in spite of the representation of the petitioner, the particulars of arrears were not given and respondents are taking steps for disconnecting the water supply and sewerage connections. At the time of admission, this court granted interim orders, dated 06-03-2003, subject to the condition of petitioner depositing a sum of Rs.6,500/- within a period of three weeks from the date of the order. Counter affidavit is filed on behalf of the first respondent. In the counter affidavit it is stated that the impugned demand notice, dated 15-02-2003, for an amount of Rs.13,324.50 paise, is on account of water consumption charges of Rs.1,437/- per month for the months of December, 2002 and January, 2003 and also arrears of Rs.11,887.50 paise. It is stated that though there were previous demand notices issued vide Bill No.958262569, dated 09-11-2001 for an amount of Rs.4,423.25 paise; Bill No.973124868, dated 13-06-2002 for an amount of Rs.3,153.25 paise; Bill No.980718393, dated 03-10-2002 for an amount of Rs.2,874.00 paise; Bill No.984710742, dated 01-12-2002 for an amount of Rs.1,437.00 paise and Bill No. 990407076, dated 15.02.2003 for an amount of Rs.1,437.00 paise, the said due amounts were not paid, as such the said amounts are shown as arrears. With regard to the payment of earlier bills on 01-02-2000, 30-09-2000, 01- 02-2001, 16-06-2001 and 12-07-2001, it is stated that the petitioner has paid aforementioned bills, which were issued on average consumption due to software problem and subsequently demand notices were issued based on actual water consumption by adjusting the earlier average bills. Though the details of arrears were furnished by the respondents in their counter-affidavit giving bill numbers, the same were not controverted by the petitioner by filing any reply. As much as the respondents have given the particulars of the arrears payable by the petitioner, which are included in the bill for the months of December, 2002 and January, 2003, I do not find any illegality in the impugned notice. As it is submitted that the petitioner has already paid Rs.6,500/- pursuant to interim order dated 06-03-2003, the petitioner is permitted to pay the balance payment within a period of two months from today. Subject to above directions, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. ______________________ R.SUBHASH REDDY,J. 01st July, 2009 SKMR/ YVL