SRI DHANALAKSHMI VENKATESWARA RAW & BOILED RICE MILL, NELLOR v. SECY APERC, HYD & 2 OT
WP/39468/2012 · 2026-04-09
Maheswara Rao Kuncheam
body2012
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2012 DAILYLAW 1316 (AP) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2012 DAILYLAW 1316 (AP) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
APHC010012522012
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3504] FRIDAY, THE TENTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM WRIT PETITION NO: 39468/2012 Between:
1. SRI DHANALAKSHMI VENKATESWARA RAW & BOILED RICE MILL, NELLOR, REP.BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER P.SURESH BABU, S/O.SUBBA RAO, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, R/O.PEDDACHERUKURU, SOUTH RAJUPALEM ROAD, NELLORE-2, S.P.S.R.NELLORE DISTRICT. 2. SRI VENKATADRI RICE INDUSTRIES, REP.BY ITS PROPRIETOR B.TIRUPATHAMMA, W/O. PAPAIAH, AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS, R/O.LEBURU BIT-2, JAGADEVI PET (V) INDUKURU PET (M), S.P.S.R.NELLORE DISTRICT. 3. SRI SANKAR RICE MILL, REP.BY ITS PARTNER SRI M.VENKATESWARA RAO, S/O. KRISHNAM NAIDU, AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, R/O.PEDDACHERUKURU (V), NELLORE RURAL MANDAL, S.P.S.R.NELLORE DISTRICT. 4. SRI LAKSHMI PRASANNA RAW & BOILED RICE MILL, REP.BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER S. KOTAIAH, S/O.SRIRAMULU, AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS, R/O.NAVALAKH GARDENS, NELLORE-2, S.P.S.R.NELLORE DISTRICT. 5. SRI LAKSHMI NARASIMHA RAW & BOILED RICE MILL, REP.BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER SRI N.MADHAVARAO, S/O. RAMA NAIDU, AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS, RIO. ASHOK NAGAR, NAVALAKH GARDENS, MYPADU ROAD, NELLORE-2, S.P.S.R.NELLORE DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER(S) AND
1. SECY APERC HYD 2 OT, 4TH AND 5TH FLOOR, SINGARENI BHAVAN, RED HILLS, HYDERABAD. REP.BY ITS SECRETARY
2
2. SOUTHERN POWER DISTRIBUTION COMPANY OF ANDHRA PRADESH, LIMITED, MINT COMPOUND, SECRETARIAT ROAD, HYDERABAD REP.BY ITS CHAIRMAN & MANAGING DIRECTOR
3. THE SENIOR ACCOUNTS OFFICER OPERATION CIRCLE, SOUTHERN POWER DISTRIBUTION COMPANY OF ANDHRA PRADESH LIMITED, SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT NELLORE. ...RESPONDENT(S): Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction more particularly in the nature of Writ of Mandamus (d) declaring the action of the respondents in determining and approving Fuel Surcharge Adjustment (FSA) for the Financial Year 2010-2011 and 2011- 12 and for 1st quarter of Financial year 2012-13 pursuant to order of 1st respondent as illegal, contrary to Regulation No.1 of 2003 being arbitrary, without jurisdiction or power, and in violation of principles of natural justice and the provisions of Andhra Pradesh electricity Reform Act, 1998 and Electricity Act, 2003, besides violating petitioners rights.
guaranteed under Art.14, 19(1)(g) and 300A of Constitution of India (e) to declare the action of the respondents imposing restrictions and measures on contract power supply and consumption vide proceedings No. APERC/Secy/14/20120-13 dated 14-09-2012 as arbitrary, illegal and public policy and consequently set aside the same and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2012(WPMP 50124 OF 2012 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased grant stay the collection of FSA charges by the Respondents for all quarters of financial years 2010-11 & 2011-12 including penalties pursuant to the proceedings No. APERC/Secy/14/20120-13 dated 14-09-2012 from the petitioners pending disposal of the above writ petition in this Hon'ble Court and pass Counsel for the Petitioner(S):
1. SAI GANGADHAR CHAMARTY
Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. SRINIVASA RAO PUTLURI
2. V V SATISH (SC for APEPDCL)
3. P VINOD KUMAR
3 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM WRIT PETITION NO: 39468 of 2012 The Court made the following Order: When the matter is taken up for hearing, Sri Ch.Ganesh,
learned counsel representing Sri Sai Gangadhar Chamarthy,
learned counsel for the petitioners submits that in view of the subsequent events, cause in the present Writ Petition does not survives for further adjudication.
2. Learned Standing Counsel for APEPDCL is in attendance.
3. Recording the submission made by learned counsel for the petitioners, this Writ Petition is dismissed as infructuous. No order as to costs.
Interlocutory applications, if any, pending shall stand closed.
____________________________________ JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM Date: 10.04.2026 PSA