Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
Prashant Kumar Mishra, Ninala Jayasurya, JJ.
Ecoren Energy India Private Limited – Petitioner
Versus
The State of Andhra Pradesh – Respondent
W.A.Nos.383, 384, 388, 392, 393, 394, 396, 401, 423, 424, 433, 435, 436, 440, 441, 443, 444, 445, 446, 447, 452, 463, 470 and 477 of 2019; 6, 70, 75, 105, 110, 114, 138, 143, 156, 168, 172, 174, 175, 176, 190 and 191 of 2020; W.P.No.11461 of 2021 and W.A.Nos.880, 909, 910, 935 and 936 of 2021
Decided On : 15-03-2022
Contract Act, 1872 - Section 63 - Constitution of India, 1950- Articles 14(1) and 19(1)(g) as also Articles 301 and 302 - Cognizance of action - Issues falling for consideration in this batch of writ appeals/group of cases involve similar/overlapping background and law applicable - Therefore they are decided by this common judgment albeit group-wise - Writ appeals in Group-A have been preferred by wind and solar power generators challenging said part of common order passed by single Judge head payment due and financial quagmir despite allowing writ petitions single Judge has directed respondents/DISCOMs to honor bills of wind power generators and solar power generators and to pay same at reduced interim rate of for solar power and for wind power - In writ petitions preferred by this class of generators prayer was made for issuance of a Writ of Certiorari to quash Energy (Power-II) as well as all proceedings and consequential orders letters passed by the 2nd respondent, i.e. Southern Power Distribution Company of Andhra Pradesh Limited with a further prayer to make payment of total amounts due to petitioners towards principal amount for monthly energy bills raised by them in accordance with Power Purchase Agreements (PPAs) along with late payment surcharge levied as per terms of PPAs and direct DISCOM to abide by terms of PPAs executed with petitioners and make timely payments.
Finding of the Court:
Once again in quoting Hon’ble Supreme Court has held thus in normal rule is that in any litigation rights and obligations of parties are adjudicated upon as they obtained at commencement of litigation – Whenever there is subsequent events of fact or law which have a material barring on rights of parties to relief or on aspects of moulding appropriate relief to parties court is not precluded from taking cognizance of subsequent changes of fact and law to mould the relief - SLDC has not faced any problem during last years after when impugned order has been passed by single Judge would itself demonstrate that issuance of prior notice before curtailment or backing down is possible and, in fact one such notice has been filed by petitioners as part of material papers in.
Result: Applications dismissed.
JUDGMENT :
Prashant Kumar Mishra, J.
This batch of writ appeals has been argued analogously. However, for convenience, the writ appeals have been divided into four groups, viz. Group-A, Group-B, Group-C and Group-D.
2. The issues falling for consideration in this batch of writ appeals/group of cases involve similar/overlapping background facts and the law applicable. Therefore, they are decided by this common judgment albeit group-wise.
3. Heard Mr. C.S. Vaidyanathan, Mr. D. Prakash Reddy, Mr. Sanjay Sen, Mr. P. Sri Raghuram, Mr. Sajan Poovayya, Mr. Basava Prabhu Patil, Mr. V.V.S. Murthy, learned senior counsels, duly assisted by Mr. Kilaru Nithin Krishna, Mr. Challa Gunaranjan, Ms. Mazag Andrabi, Mr. Aniket Prasoon, Mr. Avinash Desai, Mr. Vishrov Mukerjee, Mr. Sai Sanjay Suraneni, Mr. Srinivas Mantha, Mr. T.V.P. Sai Vihari, Mr. C. Prakash Reddy, for the appellants/power generators, Mr. Puneet Jain, learned counsel assisted by Mr. Y. Nagi Reddy, for the appellants-SLDC in the respective appeals.
4. Also heard Mr. S. Sriram, learned Advocate General, for the State and the DISCOM, Mr. N. Harinath, learned Assistant Solicitor General for the Union of India, Mr. Puneet Jain, learned counsel assisted by Mr. Y. Nagi Reddy, for the SLDC, Mr. S. Sathish Kumar, learned Government Pleader for Energy and Mr. Metta Chandrasekhar Rao, for the respondents in the respective appeals.
5. Also heard Mr. Deepak Chowdhury, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. S. Sathish Kumar, learned Government Pleader for Energy, Mr. Y. Nagi Reddy, Mr. P. Srinivasa Rao and Mr. A. Vivekananda, learned counsel for the respondents in W.P.No.11461 of 2021.
GROUP-A MATTERS
6. The writ appeals in Group-A, i.e. W.A.Nos.383, 384, 393, 424, 433, 435, 436, 440, 441, 447, 463, 477 of 2019, W.A.Nos.6, 70, 75, 138 of 2020 and W.A.Nos.880, 910, 935 and 936 of 2021 have been preferred by wind and solar power generators challenging the said part of the common order dated 29.04.2019 passed by the learned single Judge under the head “payment due and the financial quagmire”, wherein, despite allowing the writ petitions, the learned single Judge has directed the respondents/DISCOMs to honour the bills of the wind power generators and solar power generators and to pay the same at the reduced “interim rate” of Rs.2.44p for solar power and Rs.2.43p for wind power.
7. In the writ petitions preferred by this class of generators, prayer was made for issuance of a Writ of Certiorari to quash G.O.Rt.No.63, Energy (Power-II) dated 01.07.2019 as well as all proceedings and consequential orders, letters dated 12.07.2019 passed by the 2nd respondent, i.e. Southern Power Distribution Company of Andhra Pradesh Limited (in short, “DISCOM”) with a further prayer to make payment of total amounts due to the petitioners towards principal amount for the monthly energy bills raised by them in accordance with the Power Purchase Agreements (PPAs) along with late payment surcharge levied as per the terms of the PPAs and direct the DISCOM to abide by the terms of the PPAs executed with the petitioners and make timely payments therein.
8. In the impugned order, the learned single Judge would hold that a third party to the contract (Govt. of A.P.) cannot give directions to modify the contract; State cannot use its Executive power to pass any order which would trench upon or occupy and intrude when the subject matter is governed by law, particularly, a central law. Consequently, the learned single Judge had quashed G.O.Rt.No.63 of 2019 dated 01.07.2019 issued by the Government of Andhra Pradesh and letter dated 12.07.2019 issued by the DISCOM and all related/consequential actions.
THE BACKGROUND FACTS AS PROJECTED BEFORE THE WRIT COURT
8.1 Due to heavy reliance on fossil fuels and inefficient and outdated coal-fired power plants contributing to global greenhouse gas emissions and resultant global warming, India b
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
