@#@#@#@#@#@#@ HONOURABLE DR.JUSTICE G.YETHIRAJULU WRIT PETITION NO:8607 of 2003 DATED: 01-02-2008 Between: M/s.Durga Para Boiling Unit, Srungavaruksham, Bhimavaram, WG District, rep.by its Proprietor:K.Srinath ..... PETITIONER AND 1. Eastern Power Distribution Company of A.P.Ltd, Bhimavaram, WG District, rep.by its Divisional Electrical Engineer (Operations) and another. .....RESPONDENTS @#@#@#@#@#@#@ ORDER: This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking to declare the action of the respondents in treating the Service Connection No.368 under Category III (B) as illegal and arbitrary and to direct the respondents to collect the tariff falling under category III only by treating the contracted load as 71 HP and to declare the proceedings requiring the petitioner to pay the difference amount of Rs.44,226/- as illegal and arbitrary. The petitioner originally obtained a connection with a contracted load of 81 HP. Subsequently, his request for rectification of the category has been accepted and the contracted load was reduced to 71 HP on payment of necessary charges. But subsequently, the contracted load was exceeded, therefore, the second respondent issued the impugned notice dated 21-04-2003 mentioning that the connection is treated as III (B) category due to exceeding of 75 HP load. Consequently, an amount of Rs.44,226/- has been arrived as shortfall for the period from 4/02 to 12/02 towards difference of fixed minimum charges. Therefore, the petitioner was requested to arrange the payment within 15 days. In pursuance of the notice, the petitioner alleged to have paid the amount under protest subject to the result of the writ petition. As seen from the record, it is noticed that there is a categorical observation that the petitioner exceeded the contracted load of 71 HP, therefore, the category was rightly converted into III (B) category. When the category is changed the petitioner is supposed to pay the fixed minimum charges as required under the rules. Therefore, I do not find any illegality in the notice issued by the second respondent and it needs no interference. Hence, the writ petition is dismissed. No order as to costs. _________________ 01st February, 2008 SKM