IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 3929 of 2004 Between: 1 M/s. T.P. Associates, a Partnership Firm, having its registered Office at 1005, 1006,10th Floor, Prestige Meridian-II, M.G. Road, Banglore, Karnataka State, rep by Managing Partner Sri K. Venkata Prasad. 2 K. Venkata Prasad, S/o Sri K. Raghuramappa. R/o Plot No. 11, Road No. 72, Prashasan Nagar, Jublee Hills, Hyderabad ..... PETITIONER(S) AND 1 A.P. Central Power Distribution Company Limited, Mint Compound, Hyderabad, rep by Managing Director 2 The Assistant Engineer, (Electrical) APCPDCL., West Marredpally, Secunderabad 3 J. Lakshmana Rao S/o Sri J. Ramachandraiah R/o H. No. D2, Essar Apartments, West Marredpally, Secunderabad .....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 an appropriate writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of mandamus declaring the action of the respondents No.1 and 2 in seeking to disconnect the power supply as illegal and arbitrary and consequently direct the respondents to continue the existing supply or in the alternative to provide a fresh connection in the name of the 1st petitioner in respect of premises bearing Service Connection Nos. C-021936, C-007739 and C-o21937, in Plot No.1 & 2 Sy. No. 485 Hotel Sarojini Devi near padmashali Kalyana Mantapam West Maredpalli Counsel for the Petitioner:M/S INDUS LAW FIRM Counsel for the Respondent No.: O.MANOHAR REDDY(SC FOR APTRANSCO) THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No. 3929 of 2004 ORDER: This writ petition is filed seeking a writ of mandamus declaring the action of respondents 1 and 2 in disconnecting the power supply to Plot Nos.1 & 2 in Sy.No.485 and in not providing fresh service connection as illegal and arbitrary. When the matter is taken up for hearing, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that pursuant to interim orders passed by this Court on 04.03.2004, the application of the petitioner was considered and power supply was extended to it. He further submits that as the power supply was restored, no further orders need be passed in the writ petition and a similar submission was also made by the learned counsel for the third respondent. In view of the submission made by the learned counsel, no further orders need be passed in the writ petition. The Writ Petition is accordingly closed. However, there shall be a direction to respondent Nos.1 and 2 to continue to supply power following the terms and conditions entered into with the petitioner. R.SUBHASH REDDY,J Date:17.06.2009 usd