THE HON'BLE Ms. JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION No. 21548 OF 2011 Dated: 02.08.2011 Between: Sawarmal Agarwal ..... PETITIONER AND The Assistant Engineer, APCPDCL, Kukatpally and 3 others .....RESPONDENTS The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE Ms. JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION No. 21548 OF 2011 O R D E R : The petitioner claims title and possession in respect of residential house bearing No.12-7-133/F/19, Anjaneya Nagar, Moosapet, High-teck city Road, Ranga Reddy District, which was granted electricity service connection under Cat-I (domestic service category) in the name of the petitioner. The present writ petition is filed aggrieved by the action of the respondents in disconnecting the power supply to the said premises on 26.07.2011, pursuant to the final assessment order dated 13.04.2010, which was served on him on 20.07.2011. It is the specific case of the petitioner that the final assessment order, which was said to have been passed on 13.04.2010 was not preceded by any enquiry as provided under Section 126 of the Electricity Act, 2003 (for short, ‘the Act’) and that he came to know about the alleged arrears when the electricity bill, dated 07.07.2010, was received by him. Disputing the amounts claimed by the respondents towards arrears, the petitioner made a representation on 10.01.2011. However, without considering his representation, the final assessment order said to have been passed on 13.04.2010 was served on him on 20.07.2011 and immediately, thereafter, on 26.07.2011 the power supply was disconnected. Aggrieved by the same, the present writ petition is filed. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Sri O.Manohar Reddy, the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents. Though the final assessment order dated 13.04.2010 refers to a provisional assessment order dated 29.01.2009 on the basis of the inspection claimed to have been made on 20.01.2009, nothing could be placed before this Court by the respondents to show that the said provisional assessment order was served upon the petitioner. Moreover, the respondents could not contradict the petitioner’s plea that the final assessment order dated 13.04.2010 was served on the petitioner only on 20.07.2011. Hence, the contention of the petitioner that the final assessment order came to be passed without conducting the provisional enquiry as contemplated under Section 126 of the Act shall be deemed to have been admitted. Consequently, the final assessment dated 13.04.2010 cannot be sustained. However, this shall not preclude the respondents to pass appropriate orders afresh following due process of law. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of permitting the petitioner to submit his objections treating the impugned order dated 13.04.2010 as provisional assessment. Such objections shall be submitted to the 2nd respondent within two (2) weeks from today. On receipt of such representation, it is open to the respondents to pass a final order in accordance with law. Having regard to the finding recorded above that the impugned order was passed without following due process of law, there shall be a direction to the respondents to restore the power supply to the premises in question forthwith. No costs. ___________ G. ROHINI, J Date: 02.08.2011 Ivd