M/S. Sree Pavan Chemicals And Minerals vs. The State Of Andhra Pradesh

Held

The Court held that the present Writ Petition had to be allowed. This decision was based on the operative portion of the judgment rendered by the Hon'ble Division Bench of the same Court in W.P.No.29672 of 2023 and batch dated June 26, 2025. The Division Bench had struck down G.O.Ms.No.7, dated April 8, 2022. Consequently, the official respondents were disentitled from levying electricity duty at the rate of one rupee per unit of sales. The Court allowed the present writ petition in terms of the aforementioned Division Bench order. No order as to costs was made. The registry was directed to attach a copy of the Division Bench order to the present order. Interlocutory applications, if any, were closed.

Facts

The petitioners, various chemical and building product companies, filed a writ petition challenging the validity of G.O.Ms.No.7, Energy (Power-II) Department, dated April 8, 2022. This Government Order (G.O.) increased the electricity duty from Rs. 0.06 paise per unit to Rs. 1/- per unit on energy sales made to commercial and industrial consumers. The petitioners contended that this enhanced levy was illegal, arbitrary, and contrary to statutory provisions. They sought a direction to prevent the respondents from levying electricity duty at the enhanced rate and to adjust any refundable amounts against future bills, while continuing to levy duty at the original rate of Rs. 0.06 paise per unit. The respondents are the State of Andhra Pradesh and the Andhra Pradesh Southern Power Distribution Company Limited (APSPDCL) and its officials.

Key Issues

1. Whether the action of the respondents in issuing G.O.Ms.No.7, Energy (Power-II) Department, dated April 8, 2022, which increased the electricity duty from Rs. 0.06 paise per unit to Rs. 1/- per unit on energy sales to commercial and industrial consumers, is illegal, arbitrary, and contrary to statutory provisions. Petitioner's contention: The petitioners argued that the G.O. is illegal and arbitrary. They relied on a judgment of the Hon'ble Division Bench in W.P.No.29672 of 2023 and batch dated June 26, 2025, which they contended squarely covered the present issue. Respondent's contention: The judgment records no specific arguments made by the respondents in opposition to the petitioners' claims, other than their role as the issuing authority of the G.O. and the distributor of electricity.