HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.240 of 2005 Date : 18.08.2009 Between : D.Ch.Yellamma. …..Petitioner And The Superintendent Engineer (Operation), North Circle, APCPDCL, Mint Compound, Hyderabad & another. …..Respondents HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.240 of 2005 ORDER : In this writ petition, the petitioner, who is allotted Quarter No.3A FF in H.No.8-2-292/82/GTN/3A FF, in Goutham Nagar near Film Nagar, Hyderabad, seeks declaration by way of Mandamus, to declare the action of respondents in not giving new electricity service connection in her name, and also in insisting for payment of arrears of the earlier consumer, who has illegally occupied the premises in question, as illegal and arbitrary. 2. In a housing scheme introduced for rehabilitation of some bonded labour, petitioner was allotted a single bed room flat bearing No.3A FF. It is her case that she was inducted into possession of that premises pursuant to the proceedings issued by the Revenue Divisional Officer in the month of June 2004. But, prior to the allotment of said flat to the petitioner, there were some unauthorised occupants, who defaulted in paying an amount of Rs.21,602/- towards the electricity consumption charges. It is the grievance of the petitioner that when she has applied for providing new service connection in her name for supply of electricity, respondents are demanding for payment of the said arrears of Rs.21,602/-, to consider her request. 3. During the pendency of the writ petition, in view of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of M/s.Isha Marbles v. Bihar State Electricity Board[1], this Court granted directions to respondents to extend power supply to the petitioner, without insisting on payment of arrears. When the matter is taken up today, it is submitted that pursuant to the interim orders of this Court, dated 19th January 2005, electricity service connection is already provided to the petitioner's flat and she is paying the consumption charges. 4. Counter affidavit is filed on behalf of respondents. Though it is categorically pleaded in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition that some illegal occupants, who were in occupation of the flat in question earlier to its allotment to the petitioner, have committed default in payment of electricity charges, and as such, the consumption bill of such illegal occupants cannot be demanded from the petitioner, the counter affidavit is silent on the said aspect. Upon a reading of the counter filed on behalf of respondents, it is evident that there is no denial of allegation of the petitioner that she was given possession and inducted into the said flat only in the first week of June 2004. 5. The petitioner is allotted the flat in question in a beneficial scheme, but it is not known as to on what basis the earlier service connection was provided to a consumer by name Smt. Manikyamma, as referred in the counter affidavit. In any event, if any amounts are due from the said Manikyamma, the same cannot be claimed from the petitioner when she applies for grant of fresh service connection pursuant to allotment of said flat in her favour. As much as the power supply is already restored and it is stated that the consumption charges are being paid regularly by the petitioner, I deem it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition, directing the respondents not to collect any arrears from the petitioner, which are the dues payable by the earlier illegal occupants of the premises. However, it is made clear that if any arrears are there on account of consumption or demand charges after the service connection is released in favour of the petitioner, it is open to the respondents to take necessary steps to collect such amounts. 6. Subject to above directions, the writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. ______________________ R. SUBHASH REDDY, J 18th August 2009 ajr [1] 1995 (2) SCC 648