Nellimarla Jute Mills Company Limited, Vs Eastern Power Distribution Company of Andhra Pradesh Ltd.

¶1

APHC010024862013

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI

¶3

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶4

WEDNESDAY,THE NINTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION NO: 30169 OF /

¶7

Between:

¶8

Nellimarla Jute Mills Company Limited,, Nellimarla village and Mandal, Vizainagarani District, Andhra Pradesh. With service connection No. VZM-021, Represented by Public Relations Officer, Sri T.V. Satyanarayana Raju, S/o. Subba Raju. Aged about 58 years Rep. by Sri K.B.Shreenath, S/o.K.V. Bhagawan Iyengar, With Service Connection No. ATP-429

¶9

...Petitioner

¶10

AND

¶11

Eastern Power Distribution Company of Andhra Pradesh Ltd, Rep. by Chairman and Managing Director, Visakhapatnam, Andhra Pradesh.

¶12

The Superintending Engineer, Operation Circle Eastern Power Distribution Company of AP Ltd., Vizianagaram, A.P.

¶13

The Senior Accounts Officer, Operation Circle, Eastern Power Distribution Company of AP Ltd., Vizianagaram, A.P.

¶14

The Andhra Pradesh Electricity Regulatory Commission, Represented by its Secretary, Red Hills, Hyderabad.

¶15

...Respondents

¶16

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be

¶17

pleased to issue an Order, direction or a Writ or more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents 1 to 3 in not adjusting 50% of the penal charges collected from the petitioner company during R&C measures imposed by the 4th respondent,^{intermsoftheorders} passed in proceedings No. APERC/Secy/154/2013 dated 08.08.2013 by APERC by adjusting in future CC Bills as illegal, arbitrary apart from violative of petitioner's rights guaranteed under Article 14 and 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India and consequently set aside the impugned disconnection notice issued by the 3rd respondent in Lr.No. SAO/Opn.,/NZM/JAO/^HT/D.No. 241 /2013 dated 11.10.2013..

¶18

lA NO: 1 OF 2013(WPMP 37458 OF 2013

¶19

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the^{circumstancesstated} in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the respondents 1 to 3 not to take any coercive steps against the petitioner company including disconnection of power supply of its service connection No. VZM-021 in pursuance of the impugned letter issued by the 3rd respondent in Lr.No. SAO/Opn.,/NZM/JAO/HT/D.No. 241 /2013 dated 11.10.2013, pending disposal of the above writ petition and to pass.

¶20

lA NO: 1 OF 2014tWVMP 71 OF 2014

¶21

Between:

¶22

Eastern Power Distribution Company of Andhra Pradesh Ltd, Rep. by

¶23

Chairman and Managing Director, Visakhapatnam, Andhra^Pradesh.

¶24

The Superintending Engineer, Operation Circle, Eastern Power Distribution Company of AP Ltd., Vizianagaram, A.P.

¶25

The Senior Accounts Officer, Operation Circle, Eastern Power Distribution Company of AP Ltd., Vizianagaram, A.P.

¶26

... Petitioners/Respondents

¶27

AND

¶28

Nellimarla Jute Mills Company Limited,, Nellimarla village and Mandal, Vizainagaram District, Andhra Pradesh. With service connection No. VZM-021, Represented by Public Relations Officer, Sri T.V. Satyanarayana Raju, S/o. Subba Raju, Aged about 58 years Rep. by Sri K.B.Shreenath, S/o.K.V. Bhagawan Iyengar, With Service Connection No. ATP-429

¶29

...Respondent/Petitioner

¶30

The Andhra Pradesh Electricity Regulatory Commission, Represented by its Secretary, Red Hills, Hyderabad.

¶31

...Respondent/Respondent

¶32

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the^{circumstancesstated} in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to vacate the interim orders passed on 22-10-2013 in W.P.M.P.^No.37458of 2013in W.P. NO. 30169 of 2013.

¶33

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI S.V.S.S.SIVA RAM

¶34

Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 to 3: SRI V V SATISH (SC for APEPDCL)

¶35

Counsel for the Respondent No.4: NONE APPEARED

¶36

The Court made the follovtring order:

¶37

APHC010024862013

¶38

[3331]

¶39

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI

¶40

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶41

WEDNESDAY,THE NINTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶42

PRESENT

¶43

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI

¶44

WRIT PETITION NO: 30169/2013

¶45

Between:

¶46

1.NELLIMARLA JUTE MILLS COMPANY LIMITED,, NELLIMARLA VILLAGE AND MANDAL, VIZAINAGARAM DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH. WITH SERVICE CONNECTION NO. VZM-021, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC RELATIONS OFFICER, SRI T.V. SATYANARAYANA RAJU, S/0. SUBBA RAJU, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS REP. BY SRI K.B.SHREENATH, S/O.K.V. BHAGAWAN IYENGAR, WITH SERVICE CONNECTION NO. ATP-429

¶47

...PETITIONER

¶48

AND

¶49

EASTERN POWER DISTRIBUTION COMPANY OF ANDHRA PRADESH LTD, REP. BY CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR, VISAKHAPATNAM, ANDHRA PRADESH.

¶50

2.THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER, OPERATION CIRCLE, EASTERN POWER DISTRIBUTION COMPANY OF AP LTD., VIZIANAGARAM, A.P.

¶51

3.THE SENIOR ACCOUNTS OFFICER, OPERATION CIRCLE, EASTERN POWER DISTRIBUTION COMPANY OF AP LTD., VIZIANAGARAM, A.P.

¶52

4.THE ANDHRA PRADESH ELECTRICITY REGULATORY COMMISSION, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, RED HILLS, HYDERABAD. ...RESPONDENT(S):

¶53

2

¶54

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased toto issue an Order, direction or a Writ or more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents 1 to 3 in not adjusting 50% of the penal charges collected from the petitioner company during R&C measures imposed by the 4th respondent, in terms of the orders passed in proceedings No. APERC/Secy/154/2013 dated 08.08.2013 by APERC by adjusting in future CC Bills as illegal, arbitrary apart from violative of petitioner's rights guaranteed under Article 14 and 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India and consequently set aside the impugned disconnection notice issued by the 3rd respondent in Lr.No. SAO/Opn.,/NZM/JAO/ HT/D.No. 241 /2013 dated 11.10.2013 and to pass.

¶55

lA NO: 1 OF 2013(WPMP 37458 OF 2013

¶56

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the respondents 1 to 3 not to take any coercive steps against the petitioner company including disconnection of power supply of its service connection No. VZM-021 in pursuance of the impugned letter issued by the 3rd respondent in Lr.No. SAO/Opn.,/NZM/JAO/HT/D.No. 241 /2013 dated 11.10.2013, pending disposal of the above writ petition and to pass.

¶57

lA NO: 1 OF 2014(WVMP 71 OF 2014

¶58

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to vacate the interim orders passed on 22-10-2013 in W.P.M.P. No. 37458 of 2013 in W.P. NO. 30169 of 2013.

¶59

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶60

1.S.V.S.S.SIVA RAM

¶61

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶62

1. VV SATISH (SC for APEPDCL)

¶63

The Court made the following ORDER:

¶64

Heard Sri Umar Abdullah, learned counsel representing Sri S V S S Siva Ram, learned counsel for the petitioner, and Ms.lswarya,^{learnedcounsel} representing Sri V V Satish, learned standing counsel for respondents 1 to 3.

¶65

3

¶66

The above writ petition has been filed to declare the action of respondents 1 to 3 in not adjusting 50% of the penal charges collected from the petitioner-company during R&C measures imposed by the 4^'' respondent, in terms of the orders passed in proceedings No.APERC/Secy/154/2⁰¹³ dated 08.08.2013 by APERC by adjusting in future CC bills, as illegal and arbitrary.

¶67

An interim order was passed on 22.10.2013 in WPMP No.37458 of 2013, which reads as under:

¶68

“Smt. Jyothi Eswar gogineni, learned standing counsel for the APEPDCL, states on instructions that the DISCOMs are in the process of taking a decision in the context of the APERCF’s order dated 08.08.2013 which requires refund of 50 per cent of the penalties already^{collected.She} therefore states that the consumers cannot seek refund or adjustment of these amounts pending such decision. However, as the APERC’s^order was passed as long back as on 08.08.2013, the DISCOMs cannot sleep over the matter at the cost of the consumer and refuse to implement the order of the APERC.

¶69

Pending further orders, the APEPDCL shall not take any coercive measures, including disconnection of power supply to the petitioner.”

¶70

Today, when the matter is taken up for consideration, learned standing counsel submitted the instructions of the Senior Accounts Officer, Operation Circle, Vizianagaram vide Lr.No.SE/0/VZM/SAO/AO(F)/AAO(F)/HT/JAO^/SA/ D.NO.360/25, dated 08.07.2025. The operative portion^{oftheinstructionsisas} under:

¶71

“Further it is to submit that, out of R&C penal charges levied during period i.e. from 12.09.2012 to 31.07.2013 for an amount of Rs. 1,42,80,047/- and adjusted 50% of R&C charges for an amount of Rs.71,40,023^{videthisOffice} Revenue Journal No.7 dated 24.06.2014 as per the direction of Hon’ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh and orders issued by Hon’ble^APERC vide proceedings No.APERC/Secy/154/13 dated 08.08.2013. in this regard there are no pending Restrictions & Control charges against HT SC.No.VZM021. as per our records.”

¶72

4

¶73

Thus, as seen from the instructions, the respondents adjusted 50% penal charges collected from the petitioners. Hence, there is no further adjudication to be required in this writ petition.

¶74