In a one-paragraph order, the single-judge bench allowed the writ petition by relying on a previous judgment (India Cements Ltd.) that had set aside a similar FSA order for the same respondent, granting liberty to apply afresh.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY
WRIT PETITION No.19997 of 2010
Date: 06.01.2012
Between:
M/s Kallam Spinning Mills Limited, Chowdavaram, Guntur District, Reptd by its Joint Managing Director, Gurram Venkata Krishna Reddy
..... Petitioner
AND
The A.P. Electricity Regulatory Commission, Reptd by its Secretary, Hyderabad And three others.
.....Respondents
Counsel for the Petitioner: Sri Sricharan Telaprolu
Counsel for Respondent No.1: Sri P.Sriraghu Ram
Counsel for respondent Nos.2 to 4: Sri O.Manoher Reddy Standing Counsel
The Court made the following:
ORDER:
This Writ Petition is filed assailing order, dated 05-06-2010, of respondent No.1, whereby he has determined Fuel Surcharge Adjustment (FSA) for the financial year 2008-2009.
At the hearing, it has come out that a batch of Writ Petitions, filed raising identical issues and questioning the order of respondent No.1, which is impugned in this Writ Petition, was disposed of by a learned single Judge of this Court on 29-07-2011 in India Cements Ltd. and another Vs. Chairman, APSERC, Hyderabad and other s[1] .
A perusal of the judgment in the aforesaid batch of cases shows that the learned Judge set aside the impugned order of respondent No.1 with liberty to the DISCOMs to file applications afresh, claiming FSA, and directing respondent No.1 to consider and deicide the same in accordance with law, if and when such applications were filed.
Having regard to the above judgment, which applies to the present case, this Writ Petition is allowed in terms of the said judgment and to the extent indicated therein.
__________________________ C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J 06th January 2012 DR
[1] 2011 (5) ALT 188
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the writ petition assailing the Fuel Surcharge Adjustment order should be allowed in light of the judgment in India Cements Ltd. Vs. Chairman, APSERC.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
India Cements Ltd. and another Vs. Chairman, APSERC, HyderabadRelied on¶16
2011 (5) ALT 188
1 provisions across 1 enactments
M/s Kallam Spinning Mills Limited
The A.P. Electricity Regulatory Commission
C.V.Nagarjuna Reddy
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
