HON’BLE Dr. JUSTICE G. YETHIRAJULU W.P.No.7724 of 2001 Dated this the 22nd day of January, 2008 Between: Heman Fan Components Pvt. Ltd., Jeedimetla, rep.by its Director R. Srinivas Reddy … Petitioner AND Central Power Distribution Co. of AP Ltd., Hyderabad, rep.by its M.D. and 2 others … Respondents HON’BLE Dr. JUSTICE G. YETHIRAJULU W.P.No.7724 of 2001 ORDER: This Writ Petition has been filed by the petitioner-company seeking to declare that the order of the second respondent, dated 19.03.2001 proposing to club all the L.T. service connections into one by converting into H.T. category is illegal and arbitrary and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. 2) The petitioner contended that though four industries are situated in one premises, they belonged to different persons and they are not connected to each other. Therefore, the proposal of the respondents to club all the service connections into one connection is illegal and arbitrary. 3) The respondents contended that for the purpose of convenience four factories have been established to prepare the components of the fans and ultimately the components are assembled making them into fans of Heman Company. The product of manufacture is same and they are in the nature of split up of common process falling under the same tariff category. The total connected loan under the four LT services exceeds the limit of 75 HP applicable for LT services. The total connected load under four LT services is 296 HP and hence, HT service has to be availed. The premises are the same. Though different gates are provided, they are not being used as physical verification. Therefore, the learned counsel for the respondents submitted that the proposal made by the respondents to club all the services is after physical verification and therefore, the petitioner is not entitled for any relief in the writ petition. 4) The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that though four units were initially established and functioned for some time, the unit Nos. 2 and 4 have been closed and the industries run by the petitioner and other person are only in existence. Therefore, the consumption for two units will not cross the limit of L.T. service and they will not come under the H.T. category. 5) From the circumstances placed by the respondents, it is established that as the services of the writ petitioner-company and other company are situated in the same premises, it can be treated as one establishment for the purpose of electricity consumption. 6) Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed. However, the respondents are directed to take into consideration the quantity of electricity consumed by the petitioner and if it exceeds the L.T. consumption, then only the common service has to convert into H.T. service, otherwise it shall be allowed to continue as L.T. service. No order as to costs. __________________ Dr.G. YETHIRAJULU, J Date: 22.01.2008 Isn