THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU WRIT PETITION No.20583 of 2008 Dated: 21.10.2010 Between: M/s. Sahitya Coir Products, Rayadupalem, Pedavegi Mandal, West Godavari District, rep. by its Proprietrix M.Naga Malleswari. .. Petitioner. And Eastern Power Distribution Co. of Andhra Pradesh Limited, Sithammadhara, Visakhapatnam, Rep. by its Chairman and Managing Director and others. .. Respondents. ORDER: It appears, the petitioner, which is an industry manufacturing coir fibre, was provided with Service Connection No.1019 under Category III. While that being so, the impugned assessment notice for back billing in Lr.No.ADE/O/R/ELR/Sub-Engr/D.No.1703/08 dated 19.06.2008 was issued by the 3rd respondent, assessing an amount of Rs.89,215/- as the loss caused to the respondent Company on account of recording less energy consumption during the period of defect in the meter of the petitioner Unit i.e., for the period from 24.06.2007 to 03.04.2008, and stating that if the petitioner is not agreeable to the said assessment, it may make appropriate representation to the 2nd respondent within 15 days from the date of service of the notice and in case there is no representation within the said period, the electricity charges payable by it shall be included as arrears in the subsequent CC bill. The grievance of the petitioner is that it submitted a representation to the 2nd respondent within 15 days from the date of service of the impugned notice, bringing to his notice that it is not liable to pay any amount under the count of back billing and also that the assessment made by the 3rd respondent was not in accordance with the terms and conditions of contract, but the 3rd acted in arbitrary manner and disconnected power supply to its unit even before expiry of 15 days’ time from the date of service of notice and without issuing any notice of disconnection. Hence, this writ petition. While admitting the writ petition on 22.09.2008, the respondents were directed to forthwith restore power supply to the petitioner unit under SC No.1019 Cat.III A, without reference to the impugned notice issued by the 3rd respondent, subject to the condition that the petitioner pays a sum of Rs.45,000/- towards the impugned demand. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the meter of the petitioner unit was functioning properly and even if there is any defect, as per clause 7.5.1.4.4 of the General Terms and Conditions of Supply, which was approved by the Andhra Pradesh Electricity Regulatory Commission vide its proceedings No.Secy/01/2006 dated 06.01.2006, the assessment can be made, at the most, for a period of 6 months prior to 21.02.2008, the date on which inspection was conducted, but the respondent Company, contrary to the said clause, made the assessment for the period in excess of six months. He also submits that the petitioner paid the amount as per the interim orders dated 22.09.2008 passed by this Court in WPMP.No.26872 of 2008 and power supply has been restored to its Service Connection. Learned counsel appearing for the respondents submits that the assessment under the impugned notice was made as per Section 126 of the Electricity Act, 2003 (for short ‘the Act’), and there is an effective alternative remedy of appeal, under Section 127 of the Act, against the impugned notice before the higher authority, subject to the payment of 50% of the impugned demand. Having regard to the submissions made by the learned counsel and also the fact that the petitioner has already paid 50% of the impugned demand pursuant to the interim orders dated 22.09.2008 passed by this Court in WPMP.No.26872 of 2008, I deem it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition directing the petitioner to approach the higher authority and file an appeal under Section 127 of the Act against the impugned notice, and upon filing such appeal, the higher authority shall entertain the same without raising any objection as to limitation and dispose it within a period of four weeks from the date of filing of the appeal. Till disposal of the appeal, the impugned notice shall not be given effect to. With the above directions, the writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. _____________ C.V.RAMULU,J 21.10.2010 v v