Dismissed

M/s. Avi Additives (P) Ltd., Plot No.4, v. The Secretary, Andhra Pradesh Electricity Regulatory

Telangana HC12 Apr 2023WP/20769/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Telangana considered a Writ Petition seeking a Mandamus to set aside ER Commission orders regarding Fuel Surcharge Adjustment. The Court permitted the concluding counsel to file a waiver to withdraw the petition. The withdrawal was granted without costs.

What did the court decide?

Permission to withdraw complex writ petition is granted. Petition dismissed as withdrawn without costs.

M/s. Avi Additives (P) Ltd., Plot No.4, Vs The… — Service and Employment | Telangana HC (2023)

¶1

1321e l

¶2

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶3

WEDNESDAY,THE TWELFTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE P.MADHAVI DEVI

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO: 20769 0F 2011

¶7

Between:

¶8

M/s- AVI Additives (P) Ltd., Ptot No.4, Sy No. 100, Zinkalawada, Fathenagar Hyderabad-72, rep. by its Managing Director, Ritesh Tibrewaia Slo j]p. Tibrewala R/o. Road No.3, Banjara Hills, Hyderabad.

¶9

...PETITIONER

¶10

AND

¶11

1 The Secretary,.Andhra Pradesh Electricity Regulatory, Commission, Singareni Bhavan, Red Hills, Hyderabad.

¶12

The Central Power Distribution Company Limited, Rep. by its Chairman and lVlanaging Director Singareni Bhavan, Likdikapool, HvdeiabaO.

¶13

The Superintending Engineer, Operation Circle Centrll power Distribution Company of Andhra Pradesh Limited, Hyderabad.

¶14

The Senior Accounts Officer, Operation Circle, Hyderabad North, Hyderabad.

¶15

...RESPONDENTS

¶16

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 Writ, Order or Direction, more particularly, one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the orders issued by 1st respondent in proceeding Nos. APERC/Secy./Jt.Dir. (Tariff-Engg.)/No.05 ApERC/Secy./Jt.Dir. (TariffEngg.)/No.06, APERC/Secy./Jt.Dir. (Tariff-Engg. )iNo.07 and ApERC/Secy./Jt. Dir. (Tariff-Engg. )/No.08, even dt. 05.06.2010, purportedly determining and approving Fuel Surcharge Adjustment (FSA) for the financial year 2008-09 (April,2008 to March, 2009) contrary to Regulation No.1 of 2003 and without any notice or public hearing as required by law as being arbitrary, illegal without jurisdiction or.power, and in violation of principles of natural-justice and the provisions of Andhra Pradesh Electricity Reform Act, 1998 and Electricity Act, 2O03, besides violating petitioners rights guaranteed under Article 14, 19 (1) (g) and 300-A of Constitution of lndia and set aside the same

¶17

l.A. NO: 1 OF 2011(WPMP. NO:25226 OF 20111

¶18

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 to suspend the operation of the orders issued by 1st respondent proceeding Nos. APERC/Secy./Jt.Dir.(Tariff-Engg.)/No,05, ApERC/Secy./Jr.Dir. (Tariff_ Engg.)/No.06, APERC/secv./Jt. Dir. (Tariff-Engg. )/No.07 and ApERC/Secy./Jt. Dir. (Tariff-Engg.)/No.08, even dt. 05.06.2010, purprotedly determining and approving Fuel surcharge Adjustment (FSA) for the financiar year 2008-09 (Aprir, 200g to March, 2009) consequenfly, revy of and coflection of FSA arising out of the above orders, by respondents in respect of consumer service number HDN-.127.1 from the Petitioner, Pending disposal of the Writ petition

¶19

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRl. K. CHENCHURAMI REDDY

¶20

counsel for the Respondents: SRr. R. vrNoD REDDy(sc FoR TsrRANsco) The Court made the following: ORDER

¶21

THE HON'BLE^{SMT. JUSTICE P.MADHAVI DEVI}

¶22

WRIT PETITI ON^{No.2O769 of 2Ol</sup>}

¶23

¶24

ORDER:

¶25

This Writ Petition^{is hled for the follou'ing relief:-}

¶26

"...Wit of Mandamus^{declanngthe ordersissued by lst respondentin} proceeding Nos-APERC/^{Secy./JtDir'(Taiff Dngg)/ No'05'APERC/ Secg'} /Jt.Dir.?anff-Engs)/No.06,APERC/Seca./Jt.Dn.[an|fDngg)/No.07, and APERC/^Seca. /^{Jt. Dir(Tariff-Engg)/No 08'euen dt 05 06'2010} purportedlg determining^{andapprouing Fuel Surcharge Adjustment(FSA)} for^the financial^{year2OO8-09@pn[ 20OB to March' 2OO9)controry to} Regulation No.l^{of 2OO3and uithoutcLng noticeor public heaingas} required by lau.t as^{betngarbitrary, ittegat tuithoutjuisdictionor pouer'} and in uiolation of^{pinciptesof natural Ttstice and the prouisions of} Antlhra Pradesh^{ElectricitA Reform Act' 1998and EtectricitAAct' 2OO3} besides uiolating^{petitionersights guarctnteedunder Arlicle 14'19(1)(9)} and 3OO-A of Constttution^{of India and set asidethe same and pass "}

¶27

2 Learned counsel^{for the petitioner seekspermission of this Court} to withdraw the^{present Writ Petition.}

¶28

Permission is accorded

¶29

There 4 Accordingly, the^{Writ Petitionis dismissed as withdraq'n} shall be no order^{as to costs.}

¶30

Miscellaneous^{petitions, if any, pending in this Writ Petition'}

¶31

shall stand closed

¶32

SD/-N. SRIHARI ASSISTANIREGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// QD SECTION OFFICER

¶33

To, 1. One CC to SRl. K. CHENCHURAMI^{REDDY, Advocate} [OPUC] 2. One CC to SRl.^R. VINOD^{REDDY(SCFORTSTRANSCO)} [OPUC] 3. Two CD copies BM. GJPA,.=-

HIGH COURT

DATED:1210412023

ORDER

a":a.- ii IAf l:, O,rl
a
'ia
:
I
L, [ 1 Ji\ 2t13
\r

¶38

WP.No.20769 of 2011

¶39

DISMISSING THE WRIT PETITION^{AS WITHDRAWN} WITHOUT COSTS

¶40

(_
1-
1) ,

M/s. Avi Additives (P) Ltd., Plot No.4, v. The Secretary, Andhra Pradesh Electricity Regulatory

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/s. Avi Additives (P) Ltd., Plot No.4, v. The Secretary, Andhra Pradesh Electricity Regulatory

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

A.Adi Lakshmi Vs The State of Telangana

M/S. Siri Organic Crop Care Vs The State of Telangana and another

M/s. Sri Rama Organics Vs The State of Telangana

N.a.Panjawani Vs Central Power Distribution Company of Ap. Limited

Andhra Pradesh Primary Teachers Association, Vs the Government of a.P., and Ano.

M/s. Printwell, represented by its Proprietor Vs The Andhra Pradesh State Seeds Development