✦ Andhra Pradesh High Court

G.Nagi Reddy v. M/s.Central Power Distribution Company of Andhra Pradesh, reptd., by its Assistant Divisional

Writ Petition No. 7508 of 2008C V NAGARJUNA

Judgment

Cause title

Counsel for the petitioners:

Sri Balaji Medamalli. Counsel for the respondents: Sri V.Ajaykumar for R.1 and R.2. This Court made the following:

ORDER:-

This Writ Petition is filed for a Writ of Mandamus to set aside proceedings dated 25-3-2008 issued by the Assistant Divisional Engineer, Operation, Central Power Distribution Company, Yemmiganur, respondent No.1 herein, whereby the petitioner is directed to pay an amount of Rs.1,78,959-50 ps., being 50% of the value of the energy allegedly pilfered by the petitioner as provisionally assessed under the impugned notice. In the view I am taking, there is no need to go into the details of the case. It will suffice to mention that on the basis of the inspection made on 14-3-2008 it is alleged that the petitioner was found pilfering electricity by tampering with the C.T. chamber seal and potential connections of the meter. Respondent No.1 provisionally estimated the value of the energy pilfered by the petitioner at Rs.3,57,919/- and he called upon the petitioner to pay 50% of the said amount pending final assessment to be made in this regard. Having heard learned counsel petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents, I am of the view that interest of justice would be met if the respondents are directed to restore the power supply to the petitioner’s unit subject to the petitioner paying Rs.85,000/- (Rupees eighty thousand only) towards the amount provisionally assessed by the respondents. The Writ Petition is accordingly disposed of. The respondents shall restore power supply petitioner’s unit immediately and the petitioner shall, within two weeks from today, pay a sum of Rs.85,000/- (Rupees eighty thousand only) towards impugned demand without prejudice to his contentions to be raised in the final assessment proceedings. Payment of the said amount shall be subject to the outcome of the final assessment proceedings. ------------------------------------ C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY,J 09-4-2008 MNR

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.

Why is this linked?

This is the original judgment text, reproduced from the public court record. Always verify it against the official record before relying on it in a filing — check it on Andhra Pradesh High Court or eCourts case status (search case no. Writ Petition No. 7508 of 2008). ← Search more judgments