THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.27240 of 2005 Date: 12.09.2007 Between: M/s. Ambica Plastic Industries R.R. District, rep., by its Proprietor Sri Ashok Kumar … Petitioner AND M/s. Central Power Distribution Company of A.P., Limited, Singareni Bhavan, Red Hills, Hyderabad and two others. … Respondents Counsel for the petitioner : Sri N. Raghavan Counsel for the respondents : Sri S.V. Ramana for Standing Counsel for APCPDCL THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.27240 of 2005 ORDER:- This writ petition is filed for a writ of Certiorari to quash the demand dated nil received by the petitioner on 20.12.2005 issued by respondent No.3 as illegal and arbitrary. The petitioner also sought for quashing of the demand of Rs.9951/- towards delayed payment of the additional consumption deposit. The petitioner is an industry holding service connection for supply of electricity by the respondents. In the impugned communication, it is called upon to furnish security equivalent to two months consumption charges (in un-numbered para 2 it is shown as 3 months’ charges). Heard Sri N. Raghavan, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri S.V. Ramana representing learned Standing Counsel for the respondents. Learned counsel for the petitioner fairly submitted that as his client realized that under the relevant terms and conditions of supply, it is liable to deposit the amount towards security equal to two months’ consumption charges, it is not intending to contest the said demand at this stage. He, however, requests for grant of a reasonable time for the petitioner to enable it to pay the balance of the said amount. He further submitted that his client is not liable to pay the interest charges of Rs.9951/-. Sri S.V. Ramana fairly conceded that if the petitioner is willing to pay the balance amount, a reasonable time may be granted to it for payment. As regards interest, he submitted that under the terms and conditions of supply, delayed payment attracts interest charges and therefore in view of the admitted delay, the petitioner is liable to pay the interest demanded in the bill dated 01.12.2005. In view of the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is willing to pay the balance amount demanded towards the additional consumption deposit, the necessity of examining the demand on merits by this Court is obviated. However, in order to enable the petitioner to pay the balance amount, as requested by the learned counsel for the petitioner, I deem it appropriate to grant two months time to the petitioner for payment of the same. With regard to interest, though the learned Standing Counsel has submitted that the petitioner is liable to pay the same under the terms and conditions of supply, neither he referred to the particular condition under which the petitioner is liable to pay interest nor he placed a set of the terms and conditions before the Court. In the absence of the same, it is not possible for this Court to adjudicate on the said issue. It is therefore deemed expedient to permit the petitioner to make a representation to respondent No.3 with respect to the payment of interest within two weeks from today and on such representation being made, respondent No.3 shall decide whether the petitioner is liable to pay interest or not. Till respondent No.3 decides the said issue, the amount of Rs.9951/- shown towards interest in bill dated 01.12.2005 shall not be recovered from the petitioner nor the power supply shall be disconnected for non-payment of the said amount. Ordered accordingly. Subject to the above, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs. As a sequel to disposal of the writ petition, WPMP.No.34994 of 2005 filed by the petitioner for interim relief is disposed of as infructuous. ____________________________ C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J Date: 12.09.2007 ES