Surya Mahalakshmi Modern Rice Mill vs. The State Of Ap

Held

The High Court disposed of the writ petition in terms of the common order passed by a Division Bench of the same Court in W.P.No.29672 of 2023 & batch dated June 26, 2025. The Division Bench's order, which was annexed to this judgment, struck down G.O.Ms.No.7, dated April 8, 2022. However, it held that the government was 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 was modified in accordance with law. The exemption granted to agricultural consumers under G.O.Ms.No.82, dated July 7, 2003, was also confirmed to remain in force. The Division Bench also struck down G.O.Ms.No.22, dated October 23, 2024, but permitted licensees to recover Duty at the rate of 6 paise per unit, subject to any exemptions granted under Section 3A of the Duty Act, with G.O.Ms.No.277, dated December 9, 1994, remaining in force.

Facts

The petitioner, Surya Mahalakshmi Modern Rice Mill, represented by its proprietor, challenged G.O.Ms.No.7, Energy (Power-III) Department, dated April 8, 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 per unit on energy sales to commercial and industrial consumers. The petitioner argued this was an arbitrary and illegal exercise of power under Section 3(1) of the Andhra Pradesh Electricity Duty Act, 1939. The consequential action of the Andhra Pradesh Eastern Power Distribution Corporation Limited (APEPDCL) in levying Electricity Duty at the enhanced rate through High Tension (HT) bills from April 2022 onwards was also challenged. The petitioner sought to set aside the G.O. and the raised bills, and to direct the refund or adjustment of excess duty paid.

Key Issues

1. Whether the action of the 1st respondent (State of AP) 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, in purported exercise of powers under 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 constitutional rights, principles of natural justice, the National Tariff Policy 2016, and the Andhra Pradesh Electricity Regulatory Commission's common order on tariff for FY 2022-23. Respondent's Contention: The judgment does not record specific arguments from the respondents, but implies they defended the G.O. and the consequential levy.