SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1989 Supreme(AP) 222

B.P.JEEVAN REDDY, V.NEELADRI RAO
Southern Steel Ltd – Appellant
Versus
A. P. State Electricity Board, Hyderabad – Respondent


JEEVAN REDDY, J.

( 1 ) CONDITION 28 of the terms and conditions notified by the A. P. State Electricity Board under Section 49 of the Electricity (Supply) Act, 1948 (hereinafter referred to as `the Act ) provides that every consumer shall deposit with the Board a sum in cash equivalent to estimated three months consumption charges. According to the petitioners all of whom are High Tension consumers of electricity in the State of Andhra Pradesh - the said condition is unreasonable and arbitrary, and that is the main contention arising herein. W. P. No. 11732 of 1984 and four other writ petitions came up for hearing before a learned single Judge, Y. V. Anjaneyulu, J. He was inclined to agree with the petitioners. The learned Judge was of the opinion that in the circumstances of the case, Board is not justified in framing the said condition, and that a deposit of two months consumption charges would suffice. But since the learned Judge was faced with earlier Bench decisions of this Court upholding the said and similar conditions, he felt it desirable to refer the matters to a Full Bench. In his order of reference the learned Judge has indicated the reasons for which the earlier Benc






















Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top