M/s. Usha Kiron lvlovies Limited, A Company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956 having v. Govinda Rao

Petition under Artrcle 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 other appropriate order or direction in the nature a writ declaring the orders issued by 1st respondent in proceedings Nos. APERC/Secy./Jt. Di(Tariff-Engg)/No.05, APERC/SECY/JT. Dir.(Tariff-Engg)No.06, APERC/Secy/Jt.Di(Tariff-Engg)No.07 and APERC/SECY/JT'DlR.(TARIFF- ENGG)NO.08,EVEN DT.5-6-2010, purportedly determining and approving Fuel Surcharge Adjustment (FSA) for the financial yeat 2OO8'20O9(April' 2008 to March, 2009) and consequently FSA charges for 2008-2009 included in H.T.C.C' Bill for the month of July 2010, daled 26-7-2010 issued to the petitioner contrary to E Regulation No.1 of 2003 and without any notice or public hearing as required by law as being arbitrary, illegal 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, beside violating petitioners rights guaranteed under Art.14,19(1) (S) and 3004 of Constitution of lndia and consequently set aside the same in the interest of justice. l.A. NO: 1 OF 2010(WPMP. NO: 25366 OF 2010) 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 suspend the operation of the orders issued by 1st respondent in Proceedings Nos. APERC/Secy/Jt.Dir.(Tariff-Engg)/No.05, APERC/Secy./Jt.Di(Tariff-Engg.),/No.06, APERC/Secy/Jt. Di(Tariff-Engg.)/No.07 and APERC/Secy/Jt. Dir.(Tariff-Engg. ) NO.08 even dt. 5-6-2010 pending disposal of the above writ petition in the interest of justice Counsel for the Petitioner: SRl. B NALIN KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent NO.1: SRI P. PRASAD SC FOR TGERC Counsel for the Respondent Nos.2 to.5: SRI N SREEDHAR REDDY (SC FOR TELANGANA TRANSCO) The Court made the following: ORDER HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUREPALLI NANDA WRIT PETITION No.2OO18 of 2O10 ORDER: Heard Sri B.Nalin Kumar, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petationers, Sri P.Prasad, learned Standing Counsel for TGERC airpearing on behalf of respondent No.1 and Sri N.Sreedhar Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for TGSPDCL appearing on behalf of respondent Nos.2 to 5. 2, The oetitioners aporoached the Court seekino Draver as under: "...issue a writ of Mandamus or other appropriate order or direction in the nature a writ declaring the orders issued by 1't respondent in proceedings Nos.APERC/Secy./Jt.Dir. (Tariff- Engg.)/No.05, APERC/Secy./lt.Dir. (Tariff-Engg.) /No.06, APERC/Secy./Jt.Dir. (Tariff-Engg.)/No. 07 and APERC/Secy./lt. Dir.(Tariff-Engg.)/No.0B, even dt.05- 06-2010 purportedly determining and approving Fuel Surcharge Adjustment (FSA) for the financial year 2008-2009(April, 2008 to March, 2009) and consequently FSA charges for 2008-2009 included in H.T.C.C. Bill for the month of July, 2010, dated 26-07- 2010 issued to the petitioner contrary to Regulation No.1 of 2003 and without any notice or public hearing 2 SN,J W.P.No.2OO18 of 2O1O as required by law as being arbitrary, illegal, without jurisdiction or power, and in violation of principles of natural justice and the provisions of Andhra pradesh Electricity Reforms Act, 1998 and Electricity Act, 2003 beside violating petitioner,s rights guaranteed under Article 14 19(1)(9) of Constitution of India and consequently set aside the same in the interest of justice and pass such other order or further orders as this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case..,

3. The case of the petitioner, in brief, is that the petitioner is one of the promoters of ,Ramoji Film City, having its registered offlce at Anajpur, Ranga Reddy District and the petitioner company challenges the orders of the Regulatory Commission dated 05.06.2010, which approved the Fuel Surcharge Adjustment (FSA) for the financial year 2008-2009. It is the specific case of the petitioner that the Commission exceeded its jurisdiction and powers under the AP Electricity Reforms Act, 1998, and the Electricity Act, 2003, by condoning the delay of over 1.5 years in filing proposals for FSA and the Commission without issuing notice or without providing an opportunity of hearing, Ievied FSA on consumers. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner filed the present writ petition. ,, * J SN,J W.P.No.20O18 of 2O1O

4. It is represented by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner that the subject lssue in the present writ petition is squarely covered by the order of this Court dated 20.01.2012 passed in W.A.No.B5B of 2011 and batch and 1 of 2072 and batch in "Jairaj Ispat Ltd., Hyderabad Vs. A.P.Regulatory Commission, Hyderabad and others" reported in 2OL2(2) ALD 739 (DB). PERUSED THE RECORD.

5. The relevant portion of the order of this Court dated 3I.07.2012 passed in W.P.Nos.19359 of 20t2 and batch in "M/s.Thermal Systems (Hyderabad) Pvt. Ltd. represented by its Senior vice President (Finance), IDA, Jeedimetla, Hyderabad Vs. Andhra Pradesh Electricity Regulatory Commission, represented by its Chairman, Red Hills, Hyderabad and others" is extracted hereunder: "Ordinarily, this Court would have set aside these orders, on the ratio laid down by the Division Bench, but as the Division Bench Judgment is the subject matter of the SLPs, this Court feels that propriety requires that the judgment of the 4 SN,J W.P.No.2OO1A of 2010 Supreme Court is awaited in the SLPs pending before it. In the facts and circumstances of the cases, all these Writ Petitions are disposed of in the following terms: 1) The orders dated L7.01.201.2 of the Commission pertaining to the FSA for the financial year 2009-10 shall not be enforced on any of the consumers of the four DISCOMS, till disposal of the SLPs pending before the Supreme Court, 2) The enforceability or otherwise of the orders of the Commission for the financial year 2009-10 shall depend upon the result of the SLPs, 3) In the event the Supreme Court confirms the judgment of the Division Bench, the orders dated 17.OL.2OI2 for the financial year 2009-10 will become unenforceable. In a converse situation, the petitioners shall be entitled to question the orders of the Commission in respect of both the financial years 2008-09 and 2009-10 on merits, 4) If any of the DISCOMS have collected the FSA from any of the consumers including the petitioners, they shall adjust the same in the future electricity bill/bills immediately falling due, which shall also be subject to the result of the SLPs before the Supreme Court. \.r ! I ,f 5 sN,l W.P.No.2OO18 of 2O1O As a sequel to disposal of these writ petitions, W.P.M.Ps filed therein are disposed of as infructuous"

6. Taking into consideration the order of this Court dated 31.O7.2O12 passed in W.p.Nos.19359 of 2Ot2 and batch (referred to and extracted above), the present writ petition is disposed of in the following terms: 1) The orders dated 05.06.201O of the Commission pertaining to the FSA for the financial year 2OO8-09 shall not be enforced on any of the consumers of the four DISCOMs, till disposal of the SLps pending before the Hon'ble Supreme Court, 2) The enforceability or otherwise of the orders of the Commission for the financial year 2OO8-09 shall depend upon the result of the SLPs, 3) In the event the Hon,ble Supreme Court confirms the judgment of the Division Bench, the orders dated O5.OG.2O1O for the financial I l 6 sN,l W.P.No.2OO1a of 2O1O I year 2OO9-1O will become unenforceable. In a converse satuation, the petitioners shal! be entitled to question the orders of the Commission in respect of both the financial years 2008-09 and 2OO9-1O on merits, and 4) If any of the DISCOMS have cotlected the FSA from any of the consumers including the petitioners, they shall adjust the same in the future electricity bill/bills immediately falling due, which shall also be subject to the result of the SLPs before the Hon'ble Supreme Court. However, there shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, the miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in the Writ Petition shall also stand closed. ,TRUE COPY// SD/-S. MALLIKARJUNA RAO ASSISTANT REGISTRAR J ECTION OFFICER 1 . The Chairman, Andhra Pradesh Electricity Regulatory Commission, Singareni Bhavan, Red Hills, Hyderablad.

2. The Chief Engineer(Commercial)Andhra Pradesh Power Coordination Committee, Vidyut, Soudha, Hyderabad

3. The Managing Director Central Power Distribution Qompany of Andhra Pradesh Ltd.. tVint Compound, Secretariat Road, HydSeEF--- \ To, 4 The sup-erintendent Engineer, operation East circre (Greater Hyderabad ) centrar Power Distributibn Qgmpanv of Andhra prao.jjn Lio, r.rriri'i r'rrqri " '-'-' Cross Roads, Rathe Bowti, Mehdip6tnam, HyOerabiO-_ soiibZe

5. The Senior Accounts Officer, Operation Circle, Centra Companyof Andhra pradesh Lid, Mehdpatnam, flina Hyderabad. I Power Distribution I Nagar X Road, \

6. One CC to SRI. B NALIN KUMAR Advocate tOpUCl 7. One CC to SRi. N SREEDHAR REDDY (SC FOR TELANGANA TRANSCO) IOPUC]

8. One CC to SRt p. PRASAD SC FOR TGERC Advocate tOpUCl 9. Two CD Copies KKS GJP % I HIGH COURT DATED:2710112025 r' CC TODA\' I I ORDER WP.No.20018 of 2010 1r ir.: J Li) 3 {:- ( .) J I 25 rEB 2ffi fsDn.'r'.! .26 \ I l1) _L '.jl DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS