The High Court dismissed a writ petition filed under Article 226 challenging the arbitrary and illegal proceedings of the A.P. Electricity Regulatory Commission regarding the approval of Fuel Surcharge Adjustment for the financial year 2008-2009 without following mandated natural justice procedures.
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 HYOERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction)
MONDAY, THE FIFTH DAY OF DECEIVIBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY TWO
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.SARATH
WRIT PETITION NO: 31337 OF 2010
Between:
M/s. Sri Sai Vishwas Industries, Plot No.65, PH-lV, IDA Cherlapally, R.R. district RRN : 1202, Rep. by its Managing Director, P. UppenderGupta
...PETITIONER
AND
...RESPONDENTS
Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a wrrt or order or direction ore particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the proceedings No. APERC/SECY.JT.DIR(TARIFFENGC)/No. 05,06,07,08/ dated 5-6-2010 of the 1st respondent as illegal, arbitrary, unjust, irrational unauthorized and contrary to Clause 45-B(4) of the A.P. Electricity Regulatory Commission (Conduct of Business) Regulatron No. 211999 and Articles 14 and 19 of Constitution of lndia and consequently set aside the same.
l.A. NO: 1OF 20 10 WPMP. NO: 39873 OF201 0)
Petition und{ r Section 151 CPC praying that in the crrc tmstances stated in the affidavit filec in support of the petition, the High Court rray bepleased to suspend the proceedings No.APERC/SE CY.Jl t.lR (TARIFFENGC)/No.05,06.0 ,O8/dated 05.06.2010 of the 1st respondent in so far as the petitioner is conder red pending disposal of the above WP.
Counsel for the Pe itioner : SRl. M. GOUTHAM REDDY Counsel for the Respondent No. 1to 4: R VINOD REDDY, SC FOR TSTRANSCO
The Court made th,I following : ORDER
I t,
, t
THE HONOURABLE SRI IUSTICE K.SARATH
WRIT PETITION No.31337 of 201,O
ORDER:
This writ petition is filed for tlre following relief:
".......to issue any writ, order of direction, more particularly one in nature of Writ Mandamus declaring the action of the respondent No.1 in issuing the proceedings dated 05.06.2010 uide proceedings No.APERC/SECY.JT.DIR(TARIFF-ENGC)/No.05, 06,07,08 thereby purportedly deterrnining and approving Fuel Surcharge Adjustment (FSA) for the financial year 2008-2009 (April, 2008 to MarclL 2009) contrary to Regulation No.1 of 2003 and without any notice or public l-rearing as required by law as being arbitrary, illegal without jurisdiction or power, and in violation of principles of natural justice"
liable to be dismissed.
'zo to 1l; scc ra
'1., . r \r t/tr-,,,-i0/,)
I I
orclet as t(),.-os s
ckrsc'.1
SD/-K.AMMAJI ASSIIJI AN T REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// (13 Sl:CflON OFFICER
To,
CHS
BS
Bsa
I I
HIGH COUR
DATED : 05/'1212022
(
,/
.) *
2
t
t ') .'$
-
ORDER
WP.No. 313:7 of 2010
DISMISSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT C )STS
6.6 gs
2 issues framed by the court
Whether proceedings by the 1st Respondent determining and approving Fuel Surcharge Adjustment for FY 2008-2009 without notice are arbitrary and illegal.
Whether the proposed Writ Petition challenging the Fuel Surcharge proceedings is barred by the judgment in Sai Bhaskar Iron Ltd.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Sai Bhaskar Iron Ltd., Vs. A.P. Electricity Regulatory CommissionReferred¶27
4 provisions across 3 enactments
M/s. Sri Sai Vishwas Industries
Government of Andhra Pradesh (through A.P. Electricity Regulatory Commission)
K. Sarath
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
