M/S. Sri Veera Krishna Raw And Boiled Rice Mill vs. The State Of Andhra Pradesh

Held

The High Court disposed of the writ petition in terms of the common order passed by a Division Bench 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. However, it 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 in the Gazette until the rate of duty is modified in accordance with law. The exemption granted to agricultural consumers under G.O.Ms.No.82, dated 07.07.2003, was also stated to remain in force. The Division Bench also struck down G.O.Ms.No.22, dated 23.10.2024, but permitted licensees to recover Duty at the rate of 6 paise per unit from consumers, subject to any exemptions, with G.O.Ms.No.277, dated 09.12.1994, remaining in force. The amendments to Section 3 by Act 10 of 2021 and Act 23 of 2024, to the extent of granting power to the government to identify categories of consumers for fixing tariff rates, were set aside. The amendments to Section 7 by Act 23 of 2024 were struck down. The amendment to Section 3 by Act 23 of 2024, granting power to fix duty between six paise and one rupee per unit, was upheld. The proviso to Section 3, stipulating a minimum duty of 6 paise per unit in the absence of notified rates, remained unaffected.

Facts

The petitioner, M/s. Sri Veera Krishna Raw and Boiled Rice Mill, filed a writ petition challenging G.O.Ms.No.7, Energy (Power-III) Department, dated 08.04.2022, issued by the State of Andhra Pradesh. This G.O. purportedly increased the levy of Electricity Duty from Rs.0.06 per unit to Rs.1.00 on energy sales to commercial and industrial consumers. The petitioner contended that this increase was arbitrary and illegal. The consequential action of the second respondent, Andhra Pradesh Eastern Power Distribution Corporation Limited (APEPDCL), in levying Electricity Duty at the enhanced rate from April 2022 onwards, was also challenged. The petitioner sought to set aside the impugned G.O. and the enhanced electricity bills, and requested a refund or adjustment of excess duty paid.

Key Issues

1. Whether the action of the first respondent in issuing G.O.Ms.No.7, dated 08.04.2022, 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, contrary to Section 3(1) of the Andhra Pradesh Electricity Duty Act, 1939? Petitioner's Contention: The petitioner argued that the G.O. was issued in colorable exercise of power, was arbitrary, illegal, unjust, unfair, unreasonable, excessive, and violative of various rights and policies. The petitioner relied on the Andhra Pradesh Electricity Duty Act, 1939, National Tariff Policy 2016, and the Andhra Pradesh Electricity Regulatory Commission's common order. Respondent's Contention: The judgment does not record specific arguments made by the respondents. However, the context implies they defended the G.O. and the consequential levy.