High Court disposed of Public Interest Litigation No. 138 of 2013 challenging the legality of 2013-14 tariff rates as infructuous without costs.
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.
HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
WEDNESDAY, THE NINTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY TWO
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI
PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO: 138 OF 2013
Between:
A. Bixam, S/o Papaiah, Occ: Private Employee, R/o H. No. 2-2-185l39l2lBlA, Mallikarjuna Nagar, Bagh Amberpet, Hyderabad.
...'ET,T,ONER
AND
,..RESPONDENTS
Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndiapraying thatin the circumslances stated in the affidavitfiled therewith,the High Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction, moreparticularly one in thenature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondentsin burdening all sectionsof people and industries with burdensome tariff vide Retail Supply Tariff Rates for the yeat 2013 - 14 issued by the 3'd Respondent on 30.3.2013 to implement the same w.e.f. 1.4.2013 as illegal, unjust, arbitrary,irrational, capricious, unreasonable and violative of Articles 14, 19 and 21 oftheConstitution oflndia and consequently set- aside the same
PILMP. NO: 216 OF 20 1 3
Petition under Section151 CPCprayingthat in the circumstances statedin the affidavit filed in support of thepetition,the High Court may be pleased to suspend the operation of the Retail SupplyTariffRatesfor the year 2013 '14 issued by the 3rd Respondent on 30.3.2013 toimplement the same w.e.f. 1.4.2013, pending disposal of the above writpetition.
PILMP. NO: 255 OF 2013
Between:
A. Bixam, S/o Papaiah, Occ:PrivateEmployee, FVo H. No. 2-2-185l39l2lBlA' Mallikariuna Nagar, Bagh Amberpet, Hyderabad.
...petitioner/petitioner
AND
2ll
...Respondents/Respondents
..Proposed Respondents
Petition under Order 16(4) of WritRules, praying thatin the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of thepetition,the High Court may be pleasedto permit the petitioner to implead the proposed respondents as RespondentsNo. 5 to I in the Public lnterest Litigation andin miscellaneous petitions filed therein. PILMP. NO: 56 0F 2013
Petition under Section 151 CPCprayingthat in the circumstances statedin the affidavit filed in support of thepetition, theHigh Courtmay be pleasedto amend the prayer in the Public lnterest Litigation as follows: "For the reasons stated above, it is just and necessary that this Hon'ble Court may bepleased to issue an appropriate wril, order or direction, moreparticularly one in thenature of Writ ofltrlandamus declaring the action of the respondents inburdening all sectionsof peopleand industries with burdensome tariff vide Retail Supply TariffRatesfor the year 2013- 14 issued by the 3rd Respondent on 30-3.2013as revisedby the 2nd Respondenton 4.4.2013, to implement the same w.e.f. 1.4.2013 as illegal, unjust, arbitrary,irrational, capricious, unreasonable and violative of Articles 14,19 and 21 of the Constitutionof lndia and consequently set-aside the same andpass such other order or ordersas this Hon'ble Court may deem fit andproper in thecircumstances of thecase".and pass
Counsel for the Petitioner: SRl. K.R. PRABHAKAR
Counsel forthe Respondent No.1: SRI NAMAVARAPU RAJESHWARARAO, ASSISTANT SOLICITOR GENERAL
Counsel for the Respondent No.2: GP FOR ENERGY
Counsel for the Respondent No.3: SRI P. SRINIVASA RAO
Counsel for the Respondent No.4: SRI O. MANOHAR REDD, (sc FoR TSTRANSCO)
The Court made the following: ORDER
TIIE HON'BLE THE CHIEF CE SATISH CIIANDRA SIIARMA
AND
TIIE IION'BLE SRI JUSTICE AAHIIAND I(T'![AR SSAVILI
PITBLIC INTEREST LITIGATIoN No.138 Otr' 2013
ORDER,p.' r,, r,., bte tte chiel Jusn e sdtish crwiba statud)
Learned counsel for the petitioner is fair enough in informing this Court that the present public interest litigation has become infructuous.
The public interest litigation is accordingly disposed of as infructuous.
Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand
closed. There shall bc no order as to costs.
SD/-PADMANBHAREODY ASSISTANT EGISTRAR
//TRUE coPY'
sEcrtoN oFFtcER
To, '1. One CC to Sri K.R. Prabhakar, Advocate [OPUC] i. i;; ac;]t GFtor Enersv, iiigh courtlor tne State of Telangana at Hvderabad IOUTI
a. iir-o'iCs to theAdvocate General, High Court for theState of Telanganaat Hyderabad. [OUT] 4. Oir;-bd to SriNa'mavarapu Ra.ieshwara Rao, AssistantSolicitorGeneral IOPUCI bne-ct to Sri P. srinivasaRao,Advocate [oPUC] b 5;;66 6 5;i b.rvi;;h;; Redirv, tscFoR APTRANSCo) LqP-Vq 7 il; 6c i;5iirl.V. namJnuiam(SC for central Government [oPUC] 8 Two CD Copies 9 One SpareCopy CHR -BS +
HIGH COURT
DATED:09/0212022
ORDER
...,"; slAT4: (l
(f'vZ
c.-) o2 tlil 2822
lJ
PlL.No.138 of 2013
DISPOSING OF THE PIL. AS INFRUCTUOUS WITHOUT COSTS,
v
iu"
@
A. Bixam
The Union of India
The State of Andhra Pradesh
A.P. Electricity Regulatory Commission
Central Power Distribution Company of A.P. Limited
Satish Chandra Sharma
Abhinand Kumar Shavili
As recorded by the court registry
Litigation brought on behalf of the public interest rather than a personal grievance, relaxing the usual rule of locus standi.
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
