Allowed

Jaggavarapu Venugopala Reddy, v. A.P. Central Power Distribution Company Limited

Andhra Pradesh HC13 Sept 2021WP/20007/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed the Writ Petition challenging a provisional assessment notice for alleged electricity theft. The Court directed the power connection to be restored upon payment of 50% of the assessed amount plus charges, with the balance payable in monthly installments.

What did the court decide?

Power connection restored on payment of 50% of assessed amount plus charges; balance of assessed amount payable in six monthly instalments.

Jaggavarapu Venugopala Reddy, Vs A.P. Central… — Consumer Protection | Andhra Pradesh HC (2021)

¶1

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A.V.SESHA SAI

¶2

WRIT PETITION No.20007 OF 2021

¶3

ORDER:

¶4

The order of provisional assessment, issued by the Deputy Executive Engineer (Operations), APCPDCL, Nujividu, Krishna District-second respondent herein vide Lr.No.DYEE/OSD/ T/NZD/D.No.1070/21, dated 13.08.2021, is under challenge in the present Writ Petition.

¶5

Heard Sri K.Srinivas, learned counsel for the petitioner, and Sri Y.Nagi Reddy, learned Standing Counsel, appearing for the respondents, apart from perusing the entire material available on record.

¶6

Petitioner’s father one Sri Khadar Reddy was issued Electricity Service Connection bearing No.6611219000003 under category-LT-I (T) Domestic and, after the death of the petitioner’s father, the name of the petitioner herein came to be incorporated in the records of the respondent-APCPDCL in respect of the said Service Connection.

¶7

According to the petitioner, he never committed any theft of electricity and, due to the mistake in the meter, the Inspecting Officials found that there was theft of electricity energy and the second respondent herein did not choose to ask the petitioner to offer explanation for the said accusation and issued the impugned provisional assessment notice, dated 13.08.2021. It is stated that, in view of the natural calamity, the

¶8

AVSS,J W.P.No.20007 of 2021

¶9

¶10

present situation cropped up and, without causing any enquiry as to the same, the Inspecting Officials came to the conclusion that the petitioner committed theft of electricity energy.

¶11

On the contrary, it is submitted by the learned Standing Counsel that, according to Clause 10.2.3 of the General Terms and Conditions of Supply, if the consumer desires restoration of supply, he is required to deposit atleast 50% of the provisionally assessed amount in addition to the other charges and he can pay the balance 50% in reasonable instalments and, in the event of failure to deposit the balance amount, as per the instalments, the licensee may disconnect the supply as per the provisions under Section 56 of the Electricity Act, 2003. Clause 10.2.3 of the General Terms and Conditions of Supply reads as under:

¶12

“10.2.3: The Provisional Assessment Notice as defined in clause 2.2.45 herein, for cases of Theft of Electricity, as per the format provided in Appendix VI, shall mention interalia:

¶13

i. Incriminating points observed during the inspection of the consumer’s premises and installation;

¶14

ii. The reasons for disconnection effected; and iii. Assessment of electricity charges due to the Company computed based on the guidelines provided in Annexure XII (VII) of Appendix XII of the GTCS.

¶15

The provisional Assessing Officer shall also inform the consumer in the said notice that:

¶16

a) If the consumer desires restoration of supply, he should deposit at least 50% of the provisionally assessed amount in addition to other charges. In the event of failure on the part of the consumer to deposit at least 50% of the amount provisionally assessed, the Service may remain disconnected.

¶17

b) The Licensee may allow the consumer to pay the balance 50% amount in reasonable instalments. If the consumer

¶18

AVSS,J W.P.No.20007 of 2021

¶19

¶20

does not pay the balance amount as per the instalments granted, the Licensee may disconnect supply as per the provisions u/s 56 of the Act”.

¶21

Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel and keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case and also Clause 10.2.3 of the General Terms and Conditions of Supply, as set out supra, this Court deems it appropriate to dispose of the Writ Petition in the following manner:

¶22

1. On payment of 50% of the provisionally assessed amount + Supervision Charges of Rs.100 + CGST 9% of Rs.9/- + SGST 9% of Rs.9/- + Reconnection Charges and other charges, the power connection of the petitioner herein shall be restored.

¶23

2. The balance of the provisionally assessed amount shall be paid in six monthly instalments commencing from 15.10.2021.

¶24

3. In the event of failure on the part of the petitioner herein, in adhering to the above conditions, it is open for the respondent authorities to take action in accordance with law.

¶25

Accordingly, Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶26

As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this Writ Petition, shall stand closed.

¶27

13^th September, 2021. Tsy

¶28

__________________ A.V.SESHA SAI, J

Jaggavarapu Venugopala Reddy, v. A.P. Central Power Distribution Company Limited

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jaggavarapu Venugopala Reddy, v. A.P. Central Power Distribution Company Limited

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

B. Santhi Vs Union of India

Gavara Tirumala Rao Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Rayapudi Nageswara Rao, Guntur and Another Vs Aphb, Hyd and Another

Sunkavalli Dhanamjayudu Vs The Andhra Pradesh Transmission Corporation

Sri Sai Enterprises Vs The Andhra Pradesh Transmission Corporation limited

Sri.G. Nithin Sai Vs The Union of India