IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA WRIT PETITION NO : 2435 of 2009 Between: K.Vara Lakshmi W/o. Late K.Vijayendranath 54-11-15/2 Isukathota Visakhapatnam-22 ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Superintendent Engineer Distribution Sub Divsion A.P.E.P.D.C.L Ltd Visakhapatnam 2 The Divisional Engineer (Assessments) Visakhapatnam. 3 The Asst Divsional Engineer Operation A.P.E.P.D.C.L Seethammadhara Visakhapatnam 4 The Divsional Engineer Operation Zone-1, Visakhapatnam 5 The Assistant Engineer Operation Maddilapalem Section, Visakhapatnam 6 The Assistant Accounts Officer E.R.O (West) Visakhapatnam. .....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 writ more particularly in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the impugned inaction of the 3rd respondent in not disposing of the Objections dt. 12-1-2009 of the petitioner, as arbitrary and unconstitutional and consequently set aside the impugned letter dt. 5-2-2009 of the 3rd respondent herein pertaining to the premises situated at D.No. 54-11-15/2 , Isukathota, Visakhapatnam-22 of the Petitioner bearing Service connections S.C. No. 2477898/Cat-I and 2477899/Cat-I respectively. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.T.M.K.CHAITANYA Counsel for the Respondents: MR.O.MANOHER REDDY The Court made the following : ORDER: This writ petition is filed by the petitioner questioning the impugned action of the 3rd respondent – Assistant Divisional Engineer, Operation, APEPDCP, Visakhapatnam in not disposing of her objections dated 12.1.2009 and consequently to set aside the impugned letter dated 5.2.2009 issued by him in regard to the premises at D.No.54-11-15/2, Isukathota, Visakhapatnam-22. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri O.Manoher Reddy, learned standing counsel for the respondent Corporation and at their request the writ petition is taken up for final disposal at the admission stage. In the earlier round of litigation, when the petitioner herein filed W.P.No.571 of 2009 questioning the provisional assessment made, this Court dismissed the writ petition observing as under; “Admittedly, the petitioner has already submitted her objections to the impugned orders on 12.1.2009 and final orders are not yet passed. Unless and until final orders are passed in the matter, after affording reasonable opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, this Court cannot interfere with the impugned orders. However, if the petitioner has any grievance in the final orders to be passed by the respondents, she is at liberty to challenge the same in appropriate proceedings.” The grievance of the petitioner in this writ petition is that even though this Court observed in W.P.No.571 of 2009 to pass final orders after considering the objections, the 3rd respondent, by the impugned order rejected the objections on the ground that the said objections have to be preferred before the Divisional Engineer, Assessment who is the appellate authority and also requested the petitioner to pay the assessment amount in a week’s time. The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that as per Section 126 of the Electricity Act, it is the Assessing Officer i.e. the Assistant Divisional Engineer who has issued the impugned notice to consider the objections to be filed by the consumer and therefore, rejection of her objections on the ground that the same have to be submitted before the Divisional Engineer is arbitrary and illegal. On instructions, the learned standing counsel for the respondent Corporation submits that as per the provisions of Section 126(3) of the Act, the objections have to be submitted to the Divisional Engineer, Assessment and if the petitioner submits any such objections before him, he will consider the same and pass appropriate orders. In that view of the matter, the petitioner is directed to submit her objections to the Divisional Engineer, Assessment within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. On such submission of the objections to the provisional assessment order, the Divisional Engineer, Assessment shall consider the same and pass appropriate orders. Till such time, the respondents are directed not to insist the petitioner for payment of the assessed amount as per the provisional assessment order. With the above directions, the writ petition is disposed of. N.V.RAMANA,J DT.18.2.2009 Note: Furnish CC in 3 days (B/o)msv