JUDGMENT : (Rajesh Shankar, J.) The present case is taken up today through Hybrid mode. 2. The present writ petition has been filed for issuance of direction upon the respondent nos. 2 to 4 i.e., Jharkhand State Electricity Regulatory Commission to accept the petition sought to be filed by the petitioner in terms with the extant rules and regulations of the respondent no. 2. Further prayer has been made for issuance of direction upon the respondent nos. 2 to 4 to urgently hear the petition assailing the disconnection notice dated 25.02.2025 arbitrarily and illegally issued by the respondent no. 1 under Section 56(1) of the Electricity Act, 2003 read with Clause 12.3(a) of the Jharkhand State Electricity Regulatory Commission (Electricity Supply Code) Regulations, 2015. The petitioner has also prayed for grant of ex-parte ad-interim protection from disconnection of its power supply line by the respondent no. 1 in the interregnum period. The petitioner has further prayed for grant of ex-parte ad-interim protection to it from payment of Rs.11,71,84,679/- in terms with the demand notice dated 01.02.2025, till the respondent no. 2 takes up the petition filed by the petitioner. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was issued disconnection notice dated 25.02.2025 and the same was replied by the petitioner on 04.03.2025. The petitioner also tried to invoke the jurisdiction of the respondent no. 2 by filing a petition under Section 86 of the Electricity Act, 2003 on 07.03.2025, however, the same was not accepted by the office of the respondent no. 2 without any written acknowledgment. A request was also made to the respondent nos. 3 and 4 to make endorsement of refusal and to assign the reason thereof, however, they denied to assign any reason for refusal. Under the said circumstance, the petitioner has been compelled to prefer the present writ petition. 4. Mr. Saket Upadhyay, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent nos. 2 to 4, on instruction, submits that in fact no such petition has been presented by the petitioner before the respondent no. 2 which is otherwise under statutory obligation to accept all petitions filed before it invoking its jurisdiction. However, if the petitioner files any such petition today, the same will be accepted by the office of the respondent no. 2 and appropriate order on the same will be passed in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible. 5. 2 which is otherwise under statutory obligation to accept all petitions filed before it invoking its jurisdiction. However, if the petitioner files any such petition today, the same will be accepted by the office of the respondent no. 2 and appropriate order on the same will be passed in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible. 5. On this, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner will file a petition before the respondent no. 2 today itself. 6. It is further submitted that the petitioner has apprehension of disconnection of electricity in view of issuance of impugned notice dated 25.02.2025 as the petitioner has deposited Rs.8,30,48,734/- out of due amount of Rs.8,80,14,561/- in terms with the energy bill dated 01.02.2025 generated for the consumption month of January, 2025. The petitioner has not deposited an amount of Rs.48,82,695/- which was added as first installment out of 24 installments for net outstanding amount of Rs.11,71,84,679/- purportedly raised by the respondent no. 1 in view of the order dated 10.12.2024 passed by the respondent no. 2 in Case (Tariff) No. 09 of 2020, as according to the petitioner, the said amount is not payable by it. 7. Mr. Ayush Ojha, AC to Mr. Srijit Choudhary, learned counsel for the respondent no. 1, submits that the impugned notice of disconnection of power supply dated 25.02.2025 has been issued to the petitioner as he has not paid the energy bill for the month of January, 2025 in its entirety, rather it only paid Rs.8,30,48,734/- against the bill amount of Rs.8,80,14,561/- withholding the first installment of Rs.48,82,695/- out of 24 installments with respect to arrear amount of bill for the period from 2006 to 2012, which has been raised against the petitioner in pursuance of the aforesaid order of the respondent no. 2. 8. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering the submission of learned counsel for the respondent nos. 2 to 4 that the office of the respondent no. 2 is ready to accept the petition to be presented by the petitioner, there is no need to further proceed in the present matter. However, since the petitioner has apprehension of disconnection of its electricity in view of impugned notice dated 25.02.2025, the same shall not be disconnected till the respondent no. 2 takes up the aforesaid petition preferred by the petitioner for its consideration. 9. However, since the petitioner has apprehension of disconnection of its electricity in view of impugned notice dated 25.02.2025, the same shall not be disconnected till the respondent no. 2 takes up the aforesaid petition preferred by the petitioner for its consideration. 9. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. 10. I.A. No. 3245 of 2025 also stands disposed of.