LawSphereX

INOX AIR PRODUCTS LTD, MEDAK DIST v. CHAIRMAN, APERC, HYD AND 4 OT

Court: High Court for State of Telangana

Bench: NAGESH BHEEMAPAKA

Judgment date:

Case summary

High Court for State of Telangana judgment dated 2026-03-10. INOX AIR PRODUCTS LTD, MEDAK DIST v. CHAIRMAN, APERC, HYD AND 4 OT. Read the judgment and case...

Judgment text

[ 3300 ] IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE TENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NAGESHBHEEMAPAKA WRIT PETITION N O: 35759 o F2 0 12 Between: INOX AIR PRODUCTS LTD, a Company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956, having its Registered Office at 7th floor, Ceeiay House, Dr. Annie Besant Road, Worli, Mumbai-400018. , and having one of its Manufacturing Unit at Plot No. 38, IDA Pashamylaram, Patancheru, Medak (DT), AP. represented by its Genaral Manager, Mr. E. S. K. Sastry. ... PETITIONER AND 1. A. P. Electricity Regulatory Commission, Singareni Bhavan, Red Hills, Hyderabad - 500 004, Represented by its Chairman 2. A. P. Power Coordination Committee, Vidyuth Soudha, Somajiguda, Hyderabad - 500 482 Represented by its Secretary 3. Central Power Distribution Company of Andhra Pradesh, Ltd. , Mint Compound, Hyderabad, A. P.

, represented by its Chairman and Managing ' Director. 4. The Superintending Engineer, Operation Circle, Central Power Distribution i Company of AP Ltd. , Sangareddy, Medak(DT), Andhra Pradesh. 5. The Senior Accounts Officer, Operation Circle, Central Power Distribution Company ofAP Ltd, Sangareddy, Medak (DT), Andhra Pradesh .. RESPONDENTS Petition under Arlicle 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a Writ of Mandamus or a Writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus declaring- I a) the demand for the HT Bill for the month of October, 2012 dated 2611012012, insofar as it relates to the purported Fuel Surcharge Adjustment (FSA) for April, 2010 to the extent of Rs. 1,11,645-10 issued by the Senior Accounts Officer, Operation Circle, Central Power Distribution Company of AP Ltd, Sangareddy, Medak, the Respondent No.

5 herein is illegal and inoperative, b) while declaring that the Orders passed by the Respondent N0. 1, viz. , A. P. Electricity Regulatory Commission, Hyderabad, on 2OlO9l2O12 in Op Nos. 28 of 2012 for April to June, 2010, 32 of 2O12 for July to September, 2010, 36 of 2012 fot October to December, 2010 and 40 of 2012 for January to March, 201l of the A. p. Electricity Regulatory Commission, the Respondent No. t herein purportedly determining and approving Fuel Surcharge Adjustment (FSA) for the financial year 201O2O11(April, 2010 to March, 2O11),is totally contrary to, and in utter violation of '1 Regulation No.

of 2003, being illegal, arbitrary and illegal and without jurisdiction, in addition to being in utter violation of principles of natural justice as also being in violation of the provisrons of AP Electricity Reforms Act, 1998 and the Electricity Act, 2003, and c) consequently, set aside the aforesaid Order of the AP Electricity Regulation Commission and, d) further issue a consequential Writ, Order or direction restraining/interdicting the Respondents from imposing or collecting any Fuel Surcharge Adjustment (FSA) total FSA liability for the year 2O1O - 11 (April, 2010 to March, 2011) amounts to approximately Rs. 43,00,0001 from the Petitioner. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI G. V. S. GANESH Counsel for the Respondent No. 2 to 5: SRI N. SREEDHAR REDDY, SC FOR TGSPOCL The Court made the following: ORDER w IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NAGESH BHEEMAPAKA WRIT PETITION No. 3 5759 of 2Ol2 LO. O3. 2026 Between: Inox Air Products Ltd ...

Petitioner AND A. P Electricity Regulatory Commission. Singareni Bhavan, Red Hills, Hyderabad, Represented by its Chairmal and 4 others ... Respondents ORDER: This Writ Petition is Iiled seeking the following reliel ".... to issue a Writ of Mandamus or a Writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus declaring a) the demand for the HT Bitl for the month of October 2Ol2 dated 26. 10. 2012, insofar as it relates to the purported Fuel Surcharge Adjustment (FSA) for April, 2010 to the extent of Rs. 1,11,645-10 issued by the Senior Accounts Officer, Operation Circle, Central Power Distribution Companv of AP Ltd, Sangareddy, Medak, the Respondent No. 5 herein is illegal and inoperative, b) while declaring that the Orders passed b]' the Respondent No. l viz. , A. P. Electricity Regulatory Commission Hyderabad on 20 /O9 /2012 in OP Nos.

2a of 2012 for Apnl to June, 2OlO, 32 of 2012 for July to September, 2010, 36 of 2Ol2 for October to December, 20iO and 40 of 2012 for January to March, 2011 of the A. P. Electricity Regulatory Commission the Respondent No t herein purportedly determining and approving Fuel Surcharge Adjustment (FSA) for the lrnancral year 2OlO-2Oll (Aprit 2010 to March 2011) is totally contrary to and in utter violation of Regulation No.

I of 2OO3 being illegal arbitrary and iltegal and without jurisdiction in addition to being in utter violation of principles of natural justicc as also being in violation of the provisions of AP ElectricitY Relorrns Ac't I998 and the Electr icit\ Act 2003 and c) consequentlr s( r asrdc ttre aforesaid Order of the AP Electricit] Regulation Conrmissron and d) further issue a consequential Wn1 Order or dlrectiorl restrainrng/interdictlng the Respondents fronr irnposrng or collccting anv Fuel Surcharge Adjustment FSA total FSA habilrlr for the _vear 2O1O 1l {April, 2010 to March 2011) anrounrs to approximatel_v Rs. 43,00,0O0/- from thc Petitioner and rssue such further or other orders as this Honble Courr ma,\ deen' fit and proper in the facts and cirbumstances o[ the casc and rer-dcr justice" 2. Heard Sri G. V. S. Ganesh, Iearned counsel for the petitioner and Sri N. Sreedhar Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for TGSPDCL for the r(lspondents. Perused the record 3.

When the matter is taken up for hearing, learned counsel for petitioner submitted that the issue raised in this Writ Petition is squarely covered b_y the order passed by this Court in W. P. No. 3706 1 of 2012, dated 25. O2. 2026 arrd therefore, the same order mav be passed in this u'rit petition as well. The operative portion of the said order reads as under: "6. Upon the arguments advanced by both the learned counsel and perusal of the orders passed by thc erst',vhile High Court of Andhra Pradesh and Telangana in W. P. No. 19359 of 2012 and batch, dated 31. O7. 2012, W. A. No. 858 OF 2011 and batch, dated 20. 01. 2012 and order passed by the High Court of Andhra Pradesh, Amaravati in W. P. No. 36984 of 2012, dated 0! ). 12. 2024, this writ pe tition is liable to be disposed ol in the following terms: 'l'he orders dated 1 2O. O9.

2O12 of the Commission pertaining to the FSA for the lst quarter of thc financral tear 2010-2011 shall not be enforced on arrr o[ the consumers of the four DISCOMs, till \ \ disposal of the SLPS pendrng before thc Supreme Court. 2) The enforceability or otheru,ise of the orders o[ the commisstons for the 1st quarter o[ the financial _vear 2010-2011 shall depend on the result of the S LPS, (3) In the event of the Supreme Court confirms the judgment of the Division Bench dated Bench dated 20. 01. 2012, the FSA for the 1st quarter of the financial ]ear 20l0-2OI I will become unbnforceable. ln a converse situation, the petitioner shall be entitled to question the orders of the Commission in respect o[ both the financial years 2010-2011 and 20 | 1-20t2. (4) In respect of the second quarter of the financial lear 20lO-2011 and thereafter, the respondents are entitled to collect the FSA's as per the order of the Commission.

The petitroner is not pressing an_v claim regarding the second quarter o[ the financial year 201O- 2Ol I and thereafter. (5) If an_r, of the DISCOMS have collected the FSA for the first quarter of the linancial year 20lO-2011 from any consumers, including the petitioner, they shalt adjust the same in the future electricity bills immedratel) falling due. This adjustment shall also be subject to the outcome of the SLPs pending before the Supreme Court. 7. Accordingly, the Writ petition is disposed of. " 4. In terms of the order passed by this Court in W. P. No. 3706 I of 2012, dated 25. 02. 2026, and for the reasons a. like, this writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand SdIC. DEEP closed SIST RAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER / To, 1. The Chairman, T. G Electricity Regulatory ission, Singareni Bhavan, Red Hills, Hyderabad - 500 004. 2. The Secretary, T G.

Power Coordination Commiftee, Vidyuth Soudha, Somajiguda, Hyderabad - 5O0 482. 3. The Chairman and Managing Director, Central Power Distribution Company of Telangana, Ltd. , Mint Compound, Hyderabad, T. G. , 4- The Superintending Engineer, Operation Circle, Central Power Distribution Company of T. G. Ltd. , Sangareddy, Medak (DT), Telangana. ry 5. The Senior Accounts Officer, Operation Circle, Central Power Distribution Company of T. G. Ltd, Sangareddy, Medak (DT), Telangana. 6. One CC to SRI G V. S GANESH, Advocate [OPUC] 7. One CC to SRI N SREEDHAR REDDY, SC FOR TGSPDCL [OPUCI 8. Two CD Copies BSR PMK W \ HIGH COURT DATED: 1010312026 P . THE r, S oR t c--. () ORDER 2 { l1A8 )ft26 ) J WP. No. 35759 of 2012 * * . S +,rc DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION, WITHOUT COSTS t'Lh . rtl 1, v\

Source: High Court for State of Telangana. Dataset: Dattam Labs. CC BY 4.0. Text extracted automatically; compare with the source PDF for layout and accuracy.