1) The present Writ Petition is filed aggrieved by the Notice dated 04.02.2026, issued by the 4th respondent, calling upon the petitioners to submit necessary documents with regard to Service Connection bearing S.C.No.116680T007000786, provided to the petitioners’ property situated in Sy.No.315/2 of Kapuluppada Village.

2) Learned counsel for the petitioners inter alia submits that the said notice was issued at the instance of the 5th respondent and referring to some Court cases i.e., O.S.No.1562 of 2005 on the file of the II Additional Senior Civil Judge Court and A.S.No.10 of 2009. He submits that in the said cases, the petitioners are not parties. He submits that in fact, pursuant to the initial notice dated 16.12.2025, the petitioners submitted relevant documents in respect of the property for which the Service Connection was granted. He submits that despite the same, the DISCOM authorities are bent upon to disconnect the power supply. In the above said circumstances, the present Writ Petition is filed.

3) On the other hand, Ms.Aishwarya Chowdary, learned Junior Standing Counsel of APEPDCL submits that the petitioners through the impugned notice in fact, were afforded further opportunity to submit the documents of ownership in respect of the subject matter property and instead of availing the same, the petitioners filed the present Writ Petition, that it is misconceived.

4) This Court has considered the submissions and perused the material on record. Admittedly, pursuant to the initial notice dated 16.12.2025, the petitioners submitted some documents. However, it appears that the 4th respondent is not satisfied with the material furnished by the petitioners therefore, granted further opportunity to submit relevant documents. In such circumstances, nothing prevented the petitioners to submit the relevant material other than the documents which were already submitted by them. Be that as it may.

5) In the impugned notice though further opportunity was afforded to the petitioners, it is not stated as to how the documents submitted by the petitioners are not proper ownership proof of the subject matter property, except a reference to the legal opinion stated to have been received by him.

6) Under those circumstances, this Court, instead of keeping the Writ Petition pending, deems it appropriate to dispose of the same granting liberty to the petitioners to submit the documents in respect of the subject matter property, other than those which were already submitted to the 4th respondent. Further, in the absence of any positive orders of the competent Court, mere civil litigation cannot be a ground to disconnect the power supply.

7) Therefore, it is deemed appropriate to also direct the 4th respondent to give an opportunity to the petitioners herein before passing any orders pursuant to the notice issued to the petitioners.

8) Till appropriate orders are passed, power supply to the subject matter service connection shall be continued.

9) Learned counsel for DISCOM shall intimate order passed by this Court, to the concerned officers forthwith.

10) With the above direction, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs.

11) Consequently, the Miscellaneous Applications pending, if any, shall stand closed.