IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU W.P.No.11145 of 2008 Date: 7th September, 2010 Between: M/s Sai Subrahmanyeswara Ice Factory, represented by its Propreitor Bethu Ramakrishna. .. Petitioner And Eastern Power Distribution Company of Andhra Pradesh Limited, Rep. by its Assistant Divisional Engineer, C&O, Ganapavaram, West Godavari and others. .. Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU W.P.No.11145 of 2008 ORAL ORDER: This writ petition is filed seeking a Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in demanding to pay balance 50% of provisionally assessed amount and threatening to disconnect power supply for failure thereof, pursuant to the provisional assessment notice vide Letter No.ADE/C&O/OSD/GNP/Docket No.13/07-08/D No.618/07 dated 8.5.2007 as arbitrary, illegal, without jurisdiction and violative of principles of natural justice and consequently direct the respondents to continue power supply to the petitioner service connection without insisting upon payment of any amount. According to the petitioner, it has availed power supply from the respondents to service connection No.3313/Cat.III, Attili village and mandal and has been regularly paying power consumption charges and it had never committed any malpractice or theft of energy at any point of time. While that being so, the Assistant Divisional Engineer, C&O, A.P. Eastern Power Distribution Company of A.P. Limited, Ganapavaram issued Provisional Assessment Notice for Theft of Electricity to the petitioner vide letter dated 8.5.2007 stating that the Assistant Divisional Engineer/DPE-2, Eluru inspected petitioner’s premises on 27.4.2007 at 11.15 hrs. and found the following: “INCRIMINATION POINTS OBSERVED: At the time of inspection supply is available to the consumer. All the seals are intact. The meter was referred to MRT Lab/Eluru for testing. On 3.5.2007, the meter was tested at MRT Lab/Eluru and the following incriminating points are made. 1. Meter MRT seals number configuration found different from departmental standard MRT seal configuration. 2. MRT seal wire is also found different from departmental sealing wire. 3. Company seal bits configuration different to standard one. 4. Hence MRT seals found counterfeited along with company seals. 5. Based on the MRT results, the theft of energy case is booked. NATURE OF OFFENCE REPORTED i) A study of your record of consumption discloses that the consumption being recorded by the Meter is unduly low taking into account the Connected Load, the number of hours of usage of electricity, the purpose for which you avail power, and related factors. ii) These taken in conjunction with the above mentioned factors indicate prima facie that you are dishonestly abstracting/ consuming/using electricity and you are guilty of Theft of Electricity under Section 135 of Electricity Act, 2003”. Thus, the respondents provisionally assessed the charges and fixed liability on the petitioner for a sum of Rs.2,27,576/- pending determination of the civil liability by the appropriate Court under Section 154(5) of the Electricity Act, 2003 and demanded the petitioner to pay 50% of the assessed amount plus supervisory charges of Rs.150/- and reconnection charges of Rs.50/-. Hence this writ petition. There is no necessity of going into all the details. It appears, petitioner has already paid an amount of Rs.1,13,988/- being 50% of the provisionally assessed amount. This is again subject to determination of civil liability by the appropriate Court under Section 154(5) of Electricity Act, 2003. In that view of the matter, the respondents are supposed to file appeal under Section 154(5) of the Electricity Act, 2003 before the Special Court constituted for the purpose and during pendency of such appeal, the power supply to the petitioner’s service connection shall not be disturbed. With the above observation, the writ petition is accordingly disposed of. No order as to costs. ______________ C.V.RAMULU, J Date: 7.9.2010 DA