M/S. Dr. Reddy'S Laboratories Limited vs. The State Of Andhra Pradesh
Original PDF →No AI summary yet for this judgment.
APHC010403762026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Juri iction) [3329] FRIDAY, THE 31st DAY OF JULY 2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 21588/2026 Between:
M/S. DR. REDDY'S LABORATORIES LIMITED, HAVING ITS CTO UNIT-VI AT APIIC INDUSTRIAL ESTATE, PYDIBHEEMAVARAM (VILLAGE), RANASTHALAM MANDAL, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT - 532 409, ANDHRA PRADESH WITH SERVICE CONNECTION NO. SKL-091 REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORISED SIGNATORY, MR. GOPALA KRISHNA GANGAVELLI.
...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, ENERGY DEPARTMENT,
SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT - 522 238. 2. EASTERN POWER DISTRIBUTION COMPANY OF ANDHRA PRADESH LIMITED APEPDCL, REP. BY ITS CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR, CORPORATE OFFICE, P AND T COLONY, SEETHAMMADHARA, VISAKHAPATNAM -530 013. 3. THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER, OPERATION CIRCLE, APEPDCL, SRIKAKULAM - 532 001, ANDHRA PRADESH.
THE ASSISTANT DIVISIONAL ENGINEER, OPERATION, RANASTHALAM SUB-DIVISION, APEPDCL, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT - 532 409
THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, OPERATION DIVISION, APEPDCL, SRIKAKULAM - 532 001, ANDHRA PRADESH.
THE SENIOR ACCOUNTS OFFICER, OPERATION CIRCLE, APEPDCL, SRIKAKULAM - 532 001, ANDHRA PRADESH.
THE DEPUTY EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, OPERATION, RANASTHALAM SUB-DIVISION, APEPDCL, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT - 532 409, ANDHRA PRADESH.
...RESPONDENT(S): Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased toissue an appropriate Writ, order or direction, more particularly one in the nature of a Writ of Mandamus declaring the Assessment Notice for Short Billing bearing Case No. HT/DE/DPE/SKL/074231/2026 dated 03.06.2026 issued by the Respondent No.4 thereby levying Rs. 96,25,000/- (Rupees Ninety Six Lakhs Twenty Five Thousand Only) towards Grid Support Charges for the period from 01.04.2022 to 26.05.2026 against the Petitioner's captive co- generation plant and consequent action of the Respondents No. 2 to 7 herein in including the amount of Rs. 96,25,000/- (Rupees Ninety Six Lakhs Twenty Five Thousand Only) under the head of Short billing in the Petitioner's CC bill for the month of June 2026, as illegal, arbitrary, without juri iction, contrary to the Electricity Act, 2003 and violative of Articles 14, 19(1)(g), 265 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and consequently set aside the Assessment Notice for Short Billing bearing Case No. HT/DE/DPE/SKL/074231/2026 dated 03.06.2026 by directing the Respondents No. 2 to 7 herein to forthwith withdraw the demand of Rs. 96,25,000/- (Rupees Ninety Six Lakhs Twenty Five Thousand Only) under the head of Short billing from the Petitioner's CC Bill IA NO: 1 OF 2026 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 stay all further proceedings pursuant to the Assessment Notice for Short Billing bearing Case No. HT/DE/DPE/SKL/074231/2026 dated 03.06.2026 issued by the Respondent No.4 including recovery of the sum of Rs. 96,25,000/- (Rupees Ninety Six Lakhs Twenty Five Thousand Only) or any part thereof as arrears in the Petitioner's CC bills Counsel for the Petitioner:
CKR ASSOCIATES Counsel for the Respondent(S):
GP FOR ENERGY The Court made the following:
Heard learned counsels for the writ petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the APEPDCL.
This Writ Petition is filed claiming the following relief: “to issue Writ of Mandamus declaring the Assessment Notice for Short
Billing bearing Case No. HT/DE/DPE/SKL/074231/2026 dated 03.06.2026 issued by the Respondent No.4 thereby levying Rs. 96,25,000/- (Rupees Ninety Six Lakhs Twenty Five Thousand Only) towards Grid Support Charges for the period from 01.04.2022 to 26.05.2026 against the Petitioner's captive co- generation plant and consequent action of the Respondents No. 2 to 7 herein in including the amount of Rs. 96,25,000/- (Rupees Ninety Six Lakhs Twenty Five Thousand Only) under the head of Short billing in the Petitioner's CC bill for the month of June 2026, as illegal, arbitrary, without juri iction, contrary to the Electricity Act, 2003 and violative of Articles 14, 19(1)(g), 265 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and consequently set aside the Assessment Notice for Short Billing bearing Case No. HT/DE/DPE/SKL/074231/2026 dated 03.06.2026 by directing the Respondents No. 2 to 7 herein to forthwith withdraw the demand of Rs.96,25,000/- (Rupees Ninety Six Lakhs Twenty Five Thousand Only) under the head of Short billing from the Petitioner's CC Bill.”
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, Respondent No.4 issued Assessment Notice dated 03.02.2026 for unauthorized usage of electricity. It is alleged that, on 26.05.2026, upon inspection, it was found that the petitioner is operating a 7.7 MW co-generation plant synchronized at 11 KV with the 11 KV internal bus of its process plant connected to the grid thorugh the 132/3 KV Pydibheemavaram Sub-station and Grid Support Charges at Rs.25/- per KW per month were leviable from 04/2022 as per Clause 8(iii) of the APERC Retail Supply Tariff Order for Financial Year 2022- 23 and on the said ground, provisionally assessed a sum of Rs.96,25,000/- towards GSC for the period 01.04.2022 to 26.05.2026, besides, Rs.1,000/- towards supervision charges plus GST. He contends that, there is no unauthrozied use of electricity, but it is only a colourable attempt to recover a purported regulatory charge through a provisional assessment on the guise of unauthorized use of electricity, which is wholly inapplicable to such a charge. He contends that, the respondents have never billed any GSC against the petitioner month-on-month at any time during the entire period 04/2022 to 05/2026 and as of now sought to recover 50 months of a disputed charge, in one lump sum through coercive device of clubbing it as short billing shortfall arrears in a current CC bill, divulging the petitioner to the threat of disconnection of its continuous process of pharmaceutical facility for non- payment of a disputed regulatory charge. Even though the petitioner submitted representation dated 20.07.2026 to the respondents, the same were not considered by them. Hence the writ petition.
Per contra, Sri V.V. Satish, learned Standing Counsel appearing for APEPDCL, submitted that the demand has been raised strictly in accordance with the applicable statutory provisions and the governing regulations and requested to dismiss the writ petition.
Having regard to the submissions made by both the counsel, this Court deems it appropriate that the interest of justice would be adequately served by remanding the matter to Respondent No.2 for fresh consideration. Accordingly, Respondent No.2 shall consider the petitioner's objections, afford an opportunity of personal hearing, and pass a reasoned order in accordance with law, uninfluenced by any observations made in this order, if any. Till passing of orders, the respondents are directed to not to take any coercive steps against the petitioner.
Accordingly, this Writ Petition is disposed of. No order as to costs.
Consequently, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed.
______________________________________ JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA
Date: 31.07.2026
SP HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA
WRIT PETITION No.21588 OF 2026
Dt: 22.07.2026 W
SP
Reproduced from the public record of the Andhra Pradesh High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.