IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE TWENTY SIXTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT PETITION NO : 8840 of 2001 Between: Menati Ravindra Reddy S/o Venuku Reddy Davispeta, Indukurupeta Mandal, Nellore Dist. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Asst Commissioner of Endowments, Nellore, 2 Sri Rameshwara & Venu Gopala Swamy Temple, Pallipadu Village, Indukur Mandal, Nellore Dist. 3 The addl. Assist Engineer, A.P.Transco, Kothur Village, Indukurupeta Mandal, Nellore Dist. .....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 order writ or direction more particularly a writ of mandamus U/s Art 226 of Constitution of India declaring the action of the R1 & R2 in insisting the R3 to disconnect the electricity supply to Service Connections 972 of Pallipadu Village & service Connection of 1419 of Leburu Village connected to electricity motor installed in Ac.3.08 cents of dry land in Sy.No.127 & 174 of Pallipadu Village and the action of the R3 in seeking the disconnection of electricity supply to the petitioner land's as illegal, arbitrary, discriminatory and violative of prl. of natural justice and consequently direct the respondents not to disconnect the electricity supply to the petitioner's land Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.P.SRIDHAR REDDY Counsel for the respondents: The Court made the following: THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN Writ Petition No. 8840 of 2001 Order: The grievance of the petitioner, in short, is that the third respondent had highhandedly started to disconnect electricity supply to his land, which he had obtained on lease from respondents 1 and 2, without putting him on notice and without giving him an opportunity of being heard. Pursuant to an interim order passed by this Court, the electricity connection has not been disconnected. In his counter affidavit, the third respondent would submit that the second respondent had issued a letter directing him to disconnect the petitioner’s service connection, that they had gone to the petitioner’s land to disconnect power supply as per the terms and conditions of Clause 42.2 and that, pursuant to the interim orders of this Court, the service connection has not been disconnected. The writ petition relates to the year 2001. Pursuant to the interim orders passed by this Court, the electricity connection given to the petitioner has not been disconnected. At this length of time, as more than 8 years have since elapsed, I see no reason to go into the question as to the legality or otherwise of the action sought to be taken by the third respondent, more so in the light of the interim orders passed by this Court. It is, however, made clear that in case the respondents intend to disconnect electricity connection to the land of the petitioner, they shall do so only after putting him on notice and after giving him an opportunity of being heard. The writ petition is disposed of accordingly. No order as to costs. __________________________ RAMESH RANGANATHAN, J. Date: 26.02.2009 Nsr