K. Srinivasalu v. Central Power Distribution Company of A.P., Ltd., (AP TRANSCO), having office at & Anr.
Case at a glance
- Bench
- V ESWARAIAH
Outcome
Disposed of
With the above observations, the Writ Petition is disposed of
Provisions considered
- Electricity Act, 2003 s. 126
Judgment
Cause title
K. Srinivasalu AND ..... PETITIONER
Central Power Distribution Company of A.P., Ltd., (AP TRANSCO), having office at Singareni Bhavan, Hyderabad, rep. by its Managing Director and another .....RESPONDENTS
ORDER:
Seeking a Mandamus, declaring the action of the 2nd respondent in not disposing of the appeal filed by the petitioner against the assessment order dated 23.08.2005 passed by the Divisional Engineer in terms of Section 126 of the Electricity Act, 2003, as illegal and arbitrary, the present writ petition is filed. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned standing counsel appearing for the respondents. It is stated that Service Connection No.646, L.T.Category-I was provided to the petitioner in respect of his house bearing No.2-69, situated at Jonnagiri village, Tuggali Mandal, Kurnool District. A provisional assessment notice dated 08.06.2005 was issued estimating the pilferage charges of Rs.91,598-35ps. It is also stated that the service connection has been disconnected on 26.05.2005 with final reading
Operative part
2459. It appears that the petitioner has not made any representation, therefore, the final assessment order has been passed on 23.08.2005 by the Divisional Engineer, Assessments-II, APCPDCL, Himayat Nagar, Hyderabad. As against the said order, the petitioner filed an appeal before the 2nd respondent on 05.11.2005, requesting the appellate authority to pass orders in the appeal by following the due procedure prescribed under Section 126 of the Electricity Act, 2003 (for short ‘the Act’). When an appeal is filed, the appellate authority is expected to pass orders in accordance with law, particularly, in accordance with guidelines prescribed in Sec.126 of the Act. I do not see any basis for apprehension of the petitioner that the appellate authority is not following the prescribed procedure and the principles laid down under Section 126 of the Act. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, the 2nd respondent is directed to consider and dispose of the appeal, in accordance with law, particularly in accordance with the principles laid down in Section 126 of the Act, after giving a reasonable opportunity to the petitioner, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. With the above observations, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. ________________ V.ESWARAIAH,J Dated: 21.12.2005 Dsr
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: With the above observations, the Writ Petition is disposed of
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Electricity Act, 2003 — s. 126.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.