Telangana High Court
WP/22916/1999 of Y.RAJA Vs AP TRANSCO CUDDAPAH AND 2 OTHERS on 30 December 2004
COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE THIRTIETH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND FOUR PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B.PRAKASH RAO WRIT PETITION NO : 22916 of 1999 Between: Y. Raja S/o Kullayappa, residing at Rayalacheruvu village,
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
THURSDAY, THE THIRTIETH DAY OF DECEMBERTWO THOUSAND AND FOUR
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B.PRAKASH RAOWRIT PETITION NO : 22916 of 1999
Between:
Y. Raja S/o Kullayappa, residing at Rayalacheruvu village, YadikiMandal,Anantapur District.
... PETITIONER
AND
1. The Transmission Corporation of Andhra Pradesh Limited Vidyuth Bhavan, Kadapa, represented by its Chief Engineer (Electricity), Kadapa Zone, Kadapa.
2. The Superintending Engineer (Assessments) Kadapa.
3. The Assistant Divisional Engineer/DPE.I, Kurnool.
...RESPONDENTS
Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in thecircumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court may be pleased toissue writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ or direction declaring the orderof the first respondent passed in Appeal No.A.103-99-ATP dated 20-07-1999confirming the orders of the second respondent passed inProc.SE/A/CDP/FAO/Gooty/TDP/F.4/98-99/D.No.28/99 dated 30-04-1999 as illegalarbitrary and in violation of principles of natural justice.
Counsel for the Petitioner: MR. O.MANOHER REDDY
Counsel for the Respondents: SMT.M.VINOBHA DEVI
The Court made the following:
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER:
The petitioner herein who is running a Mineral Industry filed this writ petition interalia seeking to assail the impugned orders of assessment passed on 30-04-1999 asconfirmed in appeal on 20-07-1999, in regard to pilferage of energy found againsthim during inspection.
2. The case of the petitioner is that in the inspection made on 08-10-1998, on the allegation that there was pilferage; the present proceedings havebeen initiated. After giving notice and considering the explanation filed by thepetitioner, the initial amount of assessment of Rs.7,09,002/- was reduced toRs.2,69,678/- and the same was confirmed in appeal. Though the learned Counselappearing for the petitioner raised several contentions in regard to the correctness ofthe findings on the pilferage of energy as alleged against the petitioner, the factdiscloses that during the aforesaid inspection it was found that “the R phasepotential lead removed from the second point terminal block and cut; and the Bphase potential lead was removed from 5[th] point terminal block, meter terminal blockand left”.
3. Having regard to the said serious irregularities of pilferage by meddling with themeter, it was found that there was theft of energy by way of pilferage and ultimatelythe respondents authorities issued notice and after considering the objections raisedby the petitioner, the impugned order of assessment was passed, which wasconfirmed by the appellate authority. On the face of the very allegation as madeagainst the petitioner and as found during the inspection and especially in view ofthe concurrent findings arrived at by both the authorities holding that the petitioner isresponsible for such meddling, which lead to theft of energy, it is not open to thisCourt to go into the correctness of such factual findings, in exercise of the powersunder Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Even otherwise, it is seen that theappellate authority itself by taking into various circumstances, has drasticallyreduced the amount of assessment from Rs.7,09,002/- to Rs.2,69,678/-. In view ofthe same and especially in view of the glaring act of pilferage of energy, I do not findany merit in this writ petition.
4. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed. No costs.
Dt.30-12-2004Glv
// TRUE COPY //
Copy to:
1. The Chief Engineer (Electricity), Transmission Corporation of Andhra Pradesh Limited,Vidyuth Bhavan, Kadapa, Kadapa Zone,Kadapa.
2. The Superintending Engineer (Assessments) Kadapa.
3. The Assistant Divisional Engineer/DPE.I, Kurnool.
4. Two C.D copies.
__________________
B. PRAKASH RAO, J
ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
SECTION OFFICER