M/S. Madhu Raw And Boiled Rice Mill vs. The State Of Andhra Pradesh

Held

The Court held that the issue involved in the writ petition was covered by the common order passed by the Division Bench of the High Court in W.P.No.29672 of 2023 & batch dated 26.06.2025. The Division Bench had struck down G.O.Ms.No.7, dated 08.04.2022. The reasoning was that since G.O.Ms.No.7 was struck down, the sanction to collect duty fixed under it was not permissible, leading to G.O.Ms.No.22 also being struck down. The Division Bench's order upheld the amendment to Section 3 by Act 23 of 2024, granting power to the government to fix duty between six paise and one rupee per unit, but set aside amendments granting power to identify consumer categories for tariff fixing. The proviso for a minimum duty of 6 paise remained unaffected. Amendments to Section 7 by Act 23 of 2024 were struck down. G.O.Ms.No.7 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. The exemption for agricultural consumers under G.O.Ms.No.82 remained in force. G.O.Ms.No.22 was struck down, but G.O.Ms.No.277 remained in force, permitting recovery of duty at 6 paise per unit. Consequently, the writ petition was disposed of in terms of the Division Bench's common order.

Facts

The petitioner, M/s. Madhu Raw and Boiled Rice Mill, filed a writ petition challenging G.O.M.S.No.7 dated 08.04.2022, issued by the 1st respondent (State of Andhra Pradesh), which exorbitantly increased the levy of Electricity Duty from Rs.0.06 to Rs.1.00 per unit on energy sales to commercial and industrial consumers. The petitioner also challenged the consequential action of the 2nd respondent (APEPDCL) in levying this enhanced duty through H.T. bills from April 2022 onwards. The petitioner argued that this action was arbitrary, illegal, violative of constitutional rights, contrary to the National Tariff Policy 2016, and the common order on Tariff for Retail Sale of Electricity for FY 2022-23. The petition sought to set aside the G.O. and the enhanced electricity bills, and to direct the refund or adjustment of excess duty paid.

Key Issues

1. Whether the action of the 1st respondent in issuing G.O.M.S.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, 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, under Section 3(1) of the Andhra Pradesh Electricity Duty Act, 1939? Petitioner's contentions: The G.O. was issued in colourable exercise of power, was contrary to law, and the consequential levy by the 2nd respondent was also illegal. The petitioner relied on the principles of natural justice and the National Tariff Policy 2016. Respondent's contentions: The judgment notes that learned counsel appearing on either side submitted that the issue was covered by a common order passed by a Division Bench of the High Court in W.P.No.29672 of 2023 & batch dated 26.06.2025. No specific arguments for the respondent were detailed in this judgment, other than the submission that the matter was covered by the aforementioned Division Bench order.