Dismissed

M/s. Agarwal Foundaries v. The Central Power Distribution Company Ltd., of A.P.

Telangana HC3 Sept 2013WP/32846/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This common order dismissed two writ petitions concerning electricity bills generated by APCPDCL for September 2012 under Restriction and Control measures. The court directed revision of bills to account for R&C measures applicable from 12.09.2012.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners aggrieved by bills were directed to revise the same for September 2012 applying R&C measures from 12.09.2012. Pending interim orders continued. Writ petitions closed.

M/s. Agarwal Foundaries Vs The Central Power… — Service and Employment | Telangana HC (2013)

¶1

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR

¶2

WP Nos.32846 & 34217 of 2012

¶3

Date: 03.09.2013

¶4

WP No.32846 of 2012:

¶5

Between:

¶6

M/s Agarwal Foundaries, Secunderabad Rep. by its Proprietor

¶7

… Petitioner

¶8

And

¶9

The Central Power Distribution Company Limited of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by its Chairman & Managing Director, Hyderabad & others

¶10

… Respondents

¶11

¶12

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR

¶13

W.P.Nos.32846 & 34217 of 2012

¶14

COMMON ORDER:

¶15

The petitioner concerns in these two cases are aggrieved by the bills generated by the Central Power Distribution Company Limited of Andhra Pradesh (APCPDCL) for the billing month of September, 2012. The issue is with regard to whether the APCPDCL should bill the petitioner concerns in the context of 80% or 60% of the CMD. This issue arises owing to the Restriction and Control (R&C) measures introduced in the State of Andhra Pradesh by the Andhra Pradesh Electricity Regulatory Commission (APERC) in September, 2012.

¶16

2. Interim orders were passed in both the writ petitions staying collection of the differential charges.

¶17

3. Sri O. Manohar Reddy, learned standing counsel, now states that the APCPDCL itself is taking corrective measures in the application of R&C measures for the billing month of September, 2012 and that necessary modifications would be made in the bills generated for the said month in respect of the petitioner concerns also, if not already effected. Sri M.P. Chandramouli, learned counsel for the petitioner concerns in these two cases, is agreeable to this course of action being adopted.

¶18

4. The writ petitions are accordingly disposed of directing the APCPDCL to revise the bills generated by it for the billing month of September, 2012, in the case of the two petitioner concerns duly taking into consideration the applicability of R&C measures only from 12.09.2012. This exercise shall be completed expeditiously. Pending this exercise, the interim orders granted by this Court in the two writ petitions shall be continued. Pending WP MPs in these two cases shall stand closed in view of this final common order. No costs.

¶19

________________ SANJAY KUMAR, J

¶20

Date: 03.09.2013 BSS

M/s. Agarwal Foundaries v. The Central Power Distribution Company Ltd., of A.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/s. Agarwal Foundaries v. The Central Power Distribution Company Ltd., of A.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

T.Chandrasekhar Reddy, Vs The A.P. Mineral Development Corporation Ltd.

E. Chinna Narasamma Vs The Government of Andhra Pradesh

V. Sudhakar Reddy, S/o. Late Krishna Reddy, Vs The Govt. of A.P.

B.K.Mohan, Vs Sri.Y.Jagadeesh Prasad

Abhinaya Enterprises (Regd. No. A/6700 1-1313), Vs The A.P. Transmission Corporation Limited

Sri Chekuri Sudhakara Raju, S/o Poornachandra Raju Vs The Government of Andhra Pradesh