IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE EIGHTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH WRIT PETITION No.14441 of 2008 Between: Jaypeem Granites Private Limited, a company incorporated under the Companies Act and having its Registered Office 8-2-603/13/3/N/B, Hyderabad - 500 034, rep. by its Managing Director Mr.Harvesh Marwaha S/o.late Sri. J.P.Marwaha, aged about 47 years, R/o. Plot No.924-G Rd.No.46, Jubilee Hills, Hyd-500 034. ..... PETITIONER AND Central Power Distribution Company of Andhra Pradesh Limited a company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956 and having its Registered Office at Singareni Bhawan, Red Hills, Hyderabad rep. by its Chief General Manager (Commercial). .....RESPONDENT Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court may be pleased to issue of a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction declaring the action of the Respondent in rejecting the Petitioner's application for a new power connection and issuing the impugned letter No.CGM(Comml)/SE(C)/DE(C)/ADE-1/F.HT/D.No.1779/08 dated 16.2.2008, as unlawful and arbitrary and also being violative of article 14 of the Constitution of India and further directing the Respondent to consider the application of the petitioner for new electricity connection without insisting on the clearance of dues of earlier allottee to Shed No.D-58, Phase-V, IDA, Jeedimetla, Hyderabad and also pass such other orders as is necessary in the interests of justice. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.M.S.SRINIVASA IYENGAR Counsel for the Respondent No.: O.MANOHAR REDDY(SC FOR APTRANSCO) The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH WRIT PETITION No.14441 of 2008 ORDER: It is the case of the petitioner that Sri Tirumala Srinivasa Castings (P) Limited was the original allottee of Shed No.58, admeasuring 1669.95 sq. yards situated at Phase-V, IDA, Jeedimetla, Hyderabad, and the said shed was transferred in favour of the petitioner by the A.P.Industrial Infrastructure Corporation Limited, Hyderabad (for short “A.P.I.I.C”), vide letter, dated 15-10- 2007. Accordingly, the petitioner applied for new electricity connection in respect of the said shed through letter, dated 17-01-2008. The Chief General Manager, A.P.C.P.D.C.L., addressed a letter to the petitioner on 16- 02-2008 stating that as per general terms and conditions of supply, for getting new connection or reconnection of the existing service, all the old arrears have to be cleared off. Hence, the petitioner is requested to pay all the arrears for getting reconnection of the existing service or new connection. It is stated that in fact, the A.P.I.I.C. also addressed a letter, dated 25-02-2008, to the Assistant Divisional Engineer, A.P.C.P.C.D.L., Jeedimetla, informing that Shed No.58 in Industrial Development Park, Jeedimetla, Phase-V has been transferred in favour of the petitioner for the balance lease period of 65 years from the date of transfer of allotment for setting up of an industrial unit for manufacture of ‘Handicrafted Stone Products (Granite)’ vide letter, dated 12- 02-2007 and that the petitioner has paid the cost of the shed to A.P.I.I.C. and accordingly, A.P.I.I.C. has no objection for applying for a fresh power connection in the name of the petitioner and for release of power connection in the said shed. Therefore, the petitioner seeks to issue a Writ of Mandamus to declare the action of the respondent in rejecting the petitioner’s application for new service connection, vide impugned letter, dated 16-02-2008, as illegal and arbitrary. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent submits that as per general terms and conditions of supply of Central Power Distribution Company of Andhra Pradesh Limited, Hyderabad, mentioned at clause 5.9.6, if there are no dues in respect of the previous service connection, either new connection or reconnection of the existing service can be given. Clause 5.9.6. reads as follows:- “5.9.6:- Dismantlement of Service Line after Termination of Agreement: On the termination of the LT or HT Agreement, the company is entitled to dismantle the service line and remove the materials, Meter, cut out etc. After termination of the Agreement, the consumer shall be treated as a fresh applicant for the purpose of giving supply to the same premises when applied for by him provided there are no dues against the previous service connection.” Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the said clause does not apply to the case of the petitioner because its case is with regard to transfer of service connection, which is defined in Clause 8.4. Clause 8.4 reads as follows:- 8.4:- Transfer of Service Connection:- The seller of the property should clear all the dues to the Company before selling such property. If the seller did not clear the dues as mentioned above, the Company may refuse to supply electricity to the premises through the already existing connection or refuse to give a new connection to the premises till all dues to the Company are cleared.” I am of the opinion that a reading of both the Clauses goes to show that whether there is any sale of the property or not, unless dues payable in respect of the previous service connection are cleared, either new connection or reconnection of the existing service cannot be given. As the aforesaid clauses have not been questioned, it cannot be said that issuance of the impugned letter is illegal or arbitrary or contrary to the general terms and conditions of supply. Therefore, I do not find any merits in the writ petition and the same is liable to be dismissed. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. ___________ 08-07-2008 Prv ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1.2CCs to 2.2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{KURR}