JUDGMENT:

Heard Ms. A. V. S. Laxmi, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri P.

Shreyas Reddy, learned Government Pleader, attached to the learned Advocate General’s Office for the State of Andhra Pradesh and Sri Metta Chandrasekhar Rao, learned standing counsel for the Central Power Distribution Corporation of A.P.Ltd. (APCPDCL), appearing for the respondents.

2. This writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the following relief:

“….to issue an appropriate Writ Order or direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring the action of the 1st Respondent in issuing G.O.Ms.No.7 Energy (Power-III) Department, dated 08.04.2022 exorbitantly increasing the levy of electricity duty from Rs. 0.06 per unit to Rs.1 per unit on the energy sales made to commercial and industrial consumers, in colourable exercise of the powers conferred under Section 3(1) of the Andhra Pradesh Electricity Duty Act, 1939, and the consequential action of the 2nd Respondent to levy electricity duty at the enhanced rate inter alia by raising bills for the months of April vide HT Bill No.2201576370, dated 05.05.2022, May 2022 vide HT Bill No.22016311826 dated 05.06.2022, June 2022 vide HT Bill No.2201645690 dated 05.07.2022, July 2022 vide HT Bill No.2201678315 dated 05.08.2022 August 2022 vide HT Bill No.220169214 dated 05.09.2022, September 2022 vide HT Bill No.2211705316 dated 05.10.2022, October 2022 vide HT Bill No.2211717640 dated 05.11.2022, November 2022 vide HT Bill No.2211735388 dated 05.12.2022, December 2022 vide HT Bill No.2301741741 dated 05.01.2023, January 2023 vide HT Bill No.2301756650 dated 05.02.2023, February 2023 vide HT Bill No.2301802078 dated 05.03.2023 in respect of Service No.VJA843, as arbitrary, illegal, unjust unfair, 2 WP No.8028 of 2 2 00 22 33 : A P H C : 3 4 2 9 3 unreasonable, excessive, violative of the fundamental and constitutional rights guaranteed under the Constitution of India, violative of the principles of natural justice, contrary to the National Tariff Policy 2016, contrary to the Common Order on Tariff for Retail Sale of Electricity during financial year 2022-2023 dated 30.03.2022 passed by the Andhra Pradesh Electricity Regulatory Commission and contrary to law and to consequently, set aside G.O.Ms.No.7, Energy (Power-III) Department, dated 08.04.2022 as well as the aforesaid bill for the month of February dated 05.03.2023 in respect of Service No VJA843 to the extent of the enhanced electricity duty by directing the 2nd Respondent to refund the excess electricity duty paid by the Petitioner for the months vide bills of April vide HT Bill No.2201576370 dated 05.05.2022 May 2022 vide HT Bill No.22016311826 dated 05.06.2022 June 2022 vide HT Bill No.2201645690 dated 05.07.2022 July 2022 vide HT Bill No.2201678315 dated 05.08.2022 August 2022 vide HT Bill No.2201692114 dated 05.09.2022 September 2022 vide HT Bill No.2211705316 dated 05.10.2022 October 2022 vide HT Bill No.2211717640 dated 05.11.2022, November 2022 vide HT Bill No.2211735388 dated 05.12.2022, December 2022 vide HT Bill No.2301741741 dated 05.01.2023, January 2023 vide HT Bill No.2301756650 dated 05.02.2023 in respect of Service No.VJA843 and not to levy electricity duty on the Petitioner at the enhanced rate anymore and for subsequent months in respect of in respect of Service No VJA843 and pass such other orders…..”

3. On the same subject matter, number of writ petitions were filed and the leading writ petition was W.P.No.16619 of 2022 which were decided by this Court vide common judgment dated 15.09.2023.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner had adopted the same arguments as advanced in those writ petitions on behalf of petitioners, so also the learned counsels appearing for the respondents.

5. In W.P.No.16619 of 2022, this Court framed the points for consideration as under:

3 WP No.8028 of 2 2 00 22 33 : A P H C : 3 4 2 9 3 “51. The following points arise for consideration and determination:-

A