Berry Alloys Limited, Vs the State of Ap

BERRY ALLOYS LIMITED,, REP. BY ITS GENERAL MANAGER COMMERCIAL AND AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY, PERI SATYANARAYANA MURTHY HAVING ITS CORPORATE OFFICE AT SIRI AVENUE SAMPAT VINAYAKA TEMPLE ROAD, ASILMETTA, VISAKHAPATNAM - 530 003 AND FACTORY AT BOBBIN, VIZIANAGARAM DISTRIC

¶11

...PETITIONER

¶12

AND

¶13

THE STATE OF AP, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY ENERGY DEPARTMENT SECRETARIAT VELAGAPUDI - 522 237 AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT

¶14

TRANSMISSION CORPORATION OF ANDHRA PRADESH LTD, (APTRANSCO) THROUGH ITS CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR VIDYUT SOUDHA GUNADALAELURU ROAD VIJAYAWADA-520004. N T R DISTRICT

¶15

THE EASTERN POWER DISTRIBUTION COMPANY OF

¶16

2

¶17

NJS,J W.P.NO.5116 OF 2026

¶18

ANDHRA PRADESH LTD, (APEPDCL) REP. ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR P AND T COLONY, SEETHAMMADARA VISAKHAPATNAM - 530 013 VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT

¶19

THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER, OPERATIONS EASTERN POWER DISTRIBUTION COMPANY OF ANDHRA PRADESH LIMITED VALASA ROAD DASANNAPET VIZIANAGARAM - 535 002 VIZIANAGARAM DISTRICT

¶20

THE DEPUTY EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, OPERATIONS EASTERN POWER DISTRIBUTION COMPANY OF ANDHRA PRADESH LIMITED BOBBILI - 535 558 VIZIANAGARAM DISTRICT

¶21

THE ASSISTANT DIVISIONAL ENGINEER, OPERATIONS EASTERN POWER DISTRIBUTION COMPANY OF ANDHRA PRADESH LIMITED BOBBILI - 535 558 VIZIANAGARAM DISTRICT

¶22

THE ASSISTANT ENGINEER, OPERATION EASTERN POWER DISTRIBUTION COMPANY OF ANDHRA PRADESH LIMITED BOBBILI - 535 558 VIZIANAGARAM DISTRICT

¶23

VIJAI ELECTRICALS LTD, REP.BY ITS GENERAL MANAGER MARKETING AND SALES HAVING ITS OFFICE AT 6-3-648/1 AND 2 OFF RAJ BHAVAN ROAD SOMAJIGUDA HYDERABAD - 500 082 TELANGANA STATE

¶24

...RESPONDENT(S):

¶25

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 topleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of a Writ of Mandamus, by declaring that the threats of disconnection of

¶26

3

¶27

NJS,J W.P.NO.5116 OF 2026

¶28

electricity to the manufacturing facility of the petitioner company situate at Bobbili, Vizianagaram District, to be arbitrary, capricious and illegal apart from being violative of Arts. 14 and 19 (1) (g) of the Constitution of India and the provisions of The Electricity Act, 2003 and to pass

¶29

IA NO: 1 OF 2026

¶30

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 pleased to issue interim direction to Respondents Nos.1 to 7 not to disconnect the electricity service being enjoyed by the factory of petitioner company at Bobbili, Vizianagaram District, pending disposal of the above writ and to pass

¶31

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶32

1.G V R CHOUDARY

¶33

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶34

1.GP FOR ENERGY

¶35

The Court made the following:

¶36

4

¶37

NJS,J W.P.NO.5116 OF 2026

¶38

ORDER:-

¶39

Heard Mr.G.V.R.Choudary, learned counsel for the petitioner.

¶40

Also heard Ms.Aishwarya Chowdary, learned counsel representing for respondent Nos.2 to 7. Notice to the 8^th respondent is deemed not necessary, as the matter is being disposed of without touching the merits.

¶41

The grievance of the petitioner in the present writ petition is that under the guise of the Prohibitory Order dated 11.12.2025 in C.E.P.No.22 of 2025, passed by the learned Special Judge for Trial and Disposal of Commercial Disputes at Visakhapatnam, the authorities of DISCOM have initiated steps for disconnection of power supply to the petitioner Industry.

¶42

On the earlier occasion, the learned Standing Counsel for APEPDCL stated that no demand was raised with reference to the Prohibitory Order dated 11.12.2025.

¶43

Today, when the matter is taken up for consideration, Ms.Aishwarya Chowdary, learned counsel, placed a copy of the communication dated 06.02.2026 addressed by the 4^th respondent to the petitioner, seeking to arrange payment of the

¶44

5

¶45

NJS,J W.P.NO.5116 OF 2026

¶46

monthly demand charges. So far as the said communication is concerned, the same is not subject matter of the writ petition. Be that as it may.

¶47

As it appears that the respondent/DISCOM authorities are not taking any coercive action, including disconnection of supply, with reference to the orders passed by the learned Commercial Court, referred to above, the writ petition is closed, leaving it open

¶48

to the petitioner to seek recourse to law, in the event any fresh

¶49

cause of action arises. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶50

As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any,

¶51

shall also stand closed.

¶52

___________________________ JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA

¶53

Note:Issue C.C by 03.03.2026 B/o Date: 26.02.2026 LSP

Berry Alloys Limited, v. the State of Ap

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Berry Alloys Limited, v. the State of Ap

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/S.Sri Dhanalaxmi Rice Mill,Wg Dist,& 2 Vs Aperc,Chairman,Hyd,&Anot

Bharat Raw & Boiled Rice Mill, Nellore Dt. & 2 Ot Vs Secy., a.P.E.R.C., Hyd & 2 Ot

Sri P.V.N. Raw & Boiled Rice Mill,Rep.by M.Prtnr.,Nellore. Vs Aperc., Rep.by Secretary, Hyderabad, & 2 Otrs.

Ragala Guru Raghavendra Vs N Reddy Prasanna

Smt K.Vijaya Lakshmi , Vs Govt of Ap., Housing Corpn,.& 3 Others

Sri Vasireddy Satyanarayana Vs Prasanna Venkatesh