M/S. Godavari Mega Aqua Food Park (P) LTD. vs. The State Of Andhra Pradesh

Held

The High Court disposed of the writ petition in terms of a common order dated June 26, 2025, passed by a Division Bench in W.P.No.29672 of 2023 & batch. The Division Bench had struck down G.O.Ms.No.7, dated April 8, 2022. However, it upheld the amendment to Section 3 of the Electricity Duty Act by Act 23 of 2024, which grants the government power to fix the rate of duty between six paise and one rupee per unit. The Division Bench also held that the government is entitled to collect duty at the rate of 6 paise per unit throughout the period from the date Act 10 of 2021 was published until the rate is modified according to law. The exemption for agricultural consumers under G.O.Ms.No.82, dated July 7, 2003, was also confirmed to remain in force. G.O.Ms.No.22, dated October 23, 2024, was struck down, but G.O.Ms.No.277, dated December 9, 1994, remained in force, permitting licensees to recover duty at 6 paise per unit.

Facts

The petitioners, M/s. Godavari Mega Aqua Food Park (P) Ltd. and other related entities, filed a writ petition challenging G.O.Ms.No.7, Energy (Power-III) Department, dated April 8, 2022. This Government Order (G.O.) purportedly increased the electricity duty from Rs.0.06 per unit to Rs.1 per unit for commercial and industrial consumers. The petitioners argued that this increase was arbitrary and illegal, and that the respondent, Andhra Pradesh Eastern Power Distribution Company Ltd. (APEPDCL), was levying and recovering electricity duty at the enhanced rate through High Tension (HT) bills from April 2022 to October 2023. The petitioners sought to set aside the G.O. and the consequent bills, and to refund the excess duty paid.

Key Issues

The primary issue before the Court was whether G.O.Ms.No.7, Energy (Power-III) Department, dated April 8, 2022, which enhanced the electricity duty from Rs.0.06 to Rs.1 per unit for commercial and industrial consumers, was legally valid. The petitioners contended that the G.O. was issued in colorable exercise of power under Section 3(1) of the Andhra Pradesh Electricity Duty Act, 1939, making it arbitrary, illegal, unjust, unfair, unreasonable, excessive, and violative of constitutional rights and principles of natural justice. They argued that the consequent action of APEPDCL in levying enhanced duty was without sanction. The State and APEPDCL did not appear to have made specific arguments recorded in this judgment, as the matter was disposed of based on a common order in a batch of writ petitions.