M/S. Rama Shrimp Hatchery vs. The State Of Andhra Pradesh

Held

The High Court disposed of the writ petition in terms of a common order passed by a Division Bench in W.P.No.29672 of 2023 & batch dated June 26, 2025. The Division Bench's order, which was adopted by this Court, had several key findings: (1) The amendment to Section 3 of the Act by Act 23 of 2024, granting power to the government to fix duty rates between six paise and one rupee per unit, was upheld. (2) Amendments to Section 3 by Act 10 of 2021 and Act 23 of 2024, allowing the government to identify consumer categories for tariff fixing, were set aside. (3) The proviso to Section 3, mandating a minimum duty of 6 paise per unit in the absence of notified rates, remained unaffected. (4) Amendments to Section 7 by Act 23 of 2024 were struck down. (5) G.O.Ms.No.7, dated April 8, 2022, was struck down, but the government was entitled to collect duty at 6 paise per unit from the date Act 10 of 2021 was published until the rate was modified lawfully. Exemptions for agricultural consumers under G.O.Ms.No.82 remained in force. (6) 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, subject to exemptions.

Facts

The petitioner, M/s. Rama Shrimp Hatchery, represented by its proprietor, filed a writ petition challenging G.O.Ms.No.7, dated April 8, 2022, issued by the Energy Department of the State of Andhra Pradesh. This Government Order (G.O.) purportedly increased the electricity duty from Rs. 0.06 per unit to Rs. 1.00 per unit for commercial and industrial consumers. The petitioner contended that this increase was arbitrary, illegal, and violative of constitutional rights, national tariff policies, and regulatory commission orders. The consequential action by the Andhra Pradesh Eastern Power Distribution Corporation Limited (APEPDCL) in levying electricity duty at the enhanced rate through High Tension (H.T.) bills from April 2022 onwards was also challenged. The petitioner sought to set aside the impugned G.O. and the H.T. bills, and to direct the refund or adjustment of excess electricity duty paid.

Key Issues

1. Whether the action of the 1st respondent in issuing G.O.Ms.No.7, dated 08-04-2022, by exorbitantly increasing the levy of Electricity Duty from Rs.0.06 per unit to Rs.1.00 on energy sales to commercial and industrial consumers constitutes a colourable exercise of power conferred under Section 3(1) of the Andhra Pradesh Electricity Duty Act, 1939, and is arbitrary, illegal, unjust, unfair, unreasonable, excessive, and violative of fundamental and constitutional rights, principles of natural justice, National Tariff Policy 2016, and the common order on Tariff for Retail Sale of Electricity for FY 2022-23 passed by the Andhra Pradesh Electricity Regulatory Commission. Petitioner's Contentions: The petitioner argued that the G.O. was issued in colourable exercise of power, violating constitutional rights and established policies. They relied on the Andhra Pradesh Electricity Duty Act, 1939, National Tariff Policy 2016, and orders of the Andhra Pradesh Electricity Regulatory Commission. Respondent's Contentions: The judgment does not explicitly record arguments made by the respondents. However, it notes that learned counsel appearing on either side submitted that the issue is covered by a common order passed by a Division Bench of the High Court.