APHC010786882013 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3209] THURSDAY, THE FIFTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA WRIT PETITION NO: 4213/2013 Between: 1. M/S. EMAMI BIOTECH LIMITED,, A COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956 & HAVING REGISTERED OFFICE AT: 887, ANANDAPUR, E.M. BY PASS, KOLKATA- 700 107, WEST BENGAL: AND HAVING ITS PLANT AT: SURVEY NO.501-510, KRISHNAPATNAM PORT-ZERO POINT, PANTAPALEM VILLAGE-524323, MUTHUKURU MANDAL SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH, REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY: MR. T. RAJ ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE SOUTHERN POWER DISTRIBUTION COMPANY OF, ANDHRA PRADESH LIMITED, A STATUTORY CORPORATION CONSTITUTED UNDER THE ANDHRA PRADESH ELECTRICITY REFORMS ACT, 1996 AND THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956, HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT: TIRUCHANOOR ROAD, BEHIND SRINIVASA KALYANA MANDAPAM, KESAVAYANI GUNTA TIRUPATHI- 517501, ANDHRA PRADESH. REPRESENTED BY THE CHAIRMAN & MANAGING DIRECTOR. 2. THE SUPERINTEND ENGINEER, OF THE SOUTHERN POWER DISTRIBUTION COMPANY OF ANDHRA PRADESH LIMITED, HAVING ITS OFFICE AT: TIRUCHANOOR ROAD, BEHIND SRINIVASA KALYANA, MANDAPAM, KESAVAYANI GUNTA TIRUPATHI- 517501, ANDHRA PRADESH. NJS,J W.P No.4213 of 2013 2 3. THE DIVISIONAL ENGINEER, OF THE SOUTHERN POWER DISTRIBUTION COMPANY OF ANDHRA PRADESH LIMITED, HAVING ITS OFFICE AT: TIRUCHANOOR ROAD, BEHIND SRINIVASA KALYANA, MANDAPAM, KESAVAYANI GUNTA TIRUPATHI- 517501, ANDHRA PRADESH. Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. SIDDHARTH CHITTURI Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. VENKATA RAMA RAO KOTA SC FOR APSPDCL 2. NJS,J W.P No.4213 of 2013 3 The Court made the following Order: The petitioner entered into a High Tension Agreement dated 08.02.2012 with the respondent-DISCOM and in the present writ petition, it is seeking to declare Clause 10 of the said agreement regarding payment of monthly minimum charges as void, arbitrary, etc., and for consequential direction to refund a sum of Rs.20,77,308/- with interest collected on account of minimum contract demand charges. 2. When the matter is called on 03.03.2026, there was no representation on behalf of the petitioner and matter was directed to be listed under the caption “for Dismissal”. 3. Though the matter is listed under the caption “for Dismissal”, there is no representation on behalf of the petitioner, even today also. 4. Under the said circumstances, this Court is inclined to dismiss the writ petition for non-prosecution. 5. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is dismissed for non-prosecution. No costs. Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. __________________________ JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA Date:05.03.2026 Ksj