Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2026 DAILYLAW 25051 (AP)

M/S.ANASUYA ICE FACTORY,PRAKASAM,&ANOT v. APERC,CHAIRMAN,HYD,& 6

WP/579/2013 · 2026-03-11

Ninala Jayasurya

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010539982013 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3209] THURSDAY,THE TWELFTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA WRIT PETITION NO: 579/2013 Between: 1. M/S.ANASUYA ICE FACTORY,PRAKASAM,&ANOT, REP. BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER, BONDALAPATI ANANDA MADHAVI, W/O. SYAINU SUNDA REDDY, AGED 33 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS, SURVEY NUMBER 698, NEAR AIULANANDA ASHRAMAM, DANVAYA PETA ROAD, VODAREVU VILLAGE, CHIRALA MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. 2. M/S. C.P.R. LCE INDUSTRIES,, REP. BY ITS PROPRIETOR CHITRA PRASADA RAO, S/O. APPALA RAO, AGED 39 YEARS, OCE:BUSINESS, NEAR ARULANANDA ASHRAMAM, DANVAYA PETA ROAD, VODAREVU CHIRALA MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1. APERC CHAIRMAN HYD 6, SINGARENI MAYAN, RED HILLS, HYDERABAD REP. BY ITS CHAIRMAN. 2. ANDHRA PRADESH POWER COORDINATION COMMITTEE, VIDYUT SOUDHA, HYDERABAD REP. BY ITS CHIEF ENGINEER [COMMERCIAL]. 2 NJS,J W.P.NO.579 OF 2013 3. SOUTHERN POWER DISTRIBUTION COMPANY OF ANDHRA PRADESH LTD, REP. BY ITS CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR, TIRUPATHI, CHITTOOR DISTRICT. 4. SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER, OPERATION CIRCLE, SOUTHERN POWER DISTRIBUTION COMPANY OF ANDHRA PRADESH LIMITED, ONGOLE, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. 5. SENIOR ACCOUNTS OFFICER, OPERATION CIRCLE, SOUTHERN POWER DISTRIBUTION COMPANY OF ANDHRA PRADESH LIMITED, ONGOLE, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. 6. ELECTRICITY REVENUE OFFICERCUMASSISTANT ACCOUNTS OFFICER, SOUTHERN POWER DISTRIBUTION COMPANY OF ANDHRA PRADESH LIMITED, CHIRALA - NS, PRAKASAM DISTRICT 7. ADDITIONAL ASSISTANT ENGINEER, ODAREVU, SOUTHERN POWER DISTRIBUTION COMPANY OF ANDHRA PRADESH LIMITED, CHIRALA, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. ...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 toto issue a writ. order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the orders issued by 1st respondent in proceeding No. APERC/Secy/Jt. Director (Tariff Engg) / No.5, APERC / Secy / Jt. Dir (Tariff Engg) / No. 06, APERC / Secy / Jt. Dir (Tariff - Engg) / No. 07 and APERC / Scey / Jt. Dir. (Tariff - Engg) / No.08, even dt. 05 06.2010, purportedly determining, and approving fuel surcharge adjustment [FSA] for the financial year 2008-2009 April, 2008 to March. 2009] contrary to regulation No. 1 of 2003 and without any notice or public hearing as required by law as 3 NJS,J W.P.NO.579 OF 2013 illegal, irregular, irrational, without jurisdiction or power, and in violation of principles of ratural justice and provisions of Electricity Act, 2003, besides violating petitioners' rights guaranteed under Art. 14, 19 (1) (g) and 300-A of Constitution of India and set aside the same and consequently direct the respondents to refund the amounts collected towards FSA charges in the monthly bills from July, 2010 onwards IA NO: 1 OF 2013(WPMP 698 OF 2013 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 to suspend the operation of orders issued by 1st respondent in proceeding No. APERC/Secy/Jt. Director (Tariff Engg) / No.5, APERC / Secy / Jt. Dir (Tariff Engg) / No. 06, APERC / Secy / Jt. Dir (Tariff - Engg) / No. 07 and APERC / Scey / Jt. Dir. (Tariff - Engg) / No.08, even dt. 05 06.2010, restraining the respondents from levying and collecting FSA and consequently direct the respondents not to charge any amount towards fuel surcharges from the petitioners, pending disposal of the main Writ Petition Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. NIMMAGADDA SATYANARAYANA Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. SRINIVASA RAO PUTLURI 2. V R REDDY KOVVURI (SC FOR APCPDCL) The Court made the following: 4 NJS,J W.P.NO.579 OF 2013 ORDER: Ms.P.Satya Haritha, learned counsel representing Mr.Nimmagadda Satyanarayana, learned counsel for the petitioners, states that the matter has become infructuous. 2. Recording the same, the Writ Petition is dismissed as infructuous. Interim orders granted, if any, shall stand vacated. No costs. Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. __________________________ JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA Date:12.03.2026 LSP