VASUDHA PHARMA CHEMICALS LTD Vs. SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Writ Petition is filed for a Mandamus to declare the action of the Respondents, in not allowing the benefit of 25% rebate on power tariff to the Petitioner in terms of G.O. Ms. No. 108, Industries and Commerce (IP) Department, dated 20-05-1996, as illegal and arbitrary.

(2.) 1 have heard Sri S.M. Subhan, learned Counsel for the Petitioner, the learned Government Pleader for Industries representing Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 and Sri O. Manoher Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for A.P. Central Power Distribution Company Limited representing Respondent Nos. 3 to 6.

(3.) The Petitioner purchased the properties of M/s. Aravind Chemical Industries situated at Jeedimetla, Ranga Reddy District, and approached the Respondents for release of HT service. The Petitioner averred that originally, the vendor of the property i.e., M/s. Aravind Chemical Industries was enjoying LT power connection for lighting purpose and that the said service connection was transferred in the name of the Petitioner with effect from June, 1997. It is the further plea of the Petitioner that for the purpose of commencing commercial production, it has applied for HT connection and that it started its commercial production with support of diesel generators and later got the HT service connection released by the Respondents. The Government of Andhra Pradesh announced its new industrial policy called "Target-2000" under GO. Ms. No. 108, dated 20-05-1996. Under the said policy, the State Government has announced various incentives to all new industrial units and 25% rebate for a period of three years in electrical charges from the date of commencement of commercial production is one such incentive. The Petitioner approached the Industries Department for issue of eligibility certificate as envisaged in the said policy. Accordingly, the District Industries Centre, Ranga Reddy District, has issued eligibility certificate in favour of the Petitioner vide EC. No. 8252/83/97, dated 26-12-1997, wheirein it has certified that the Petitioner is entitled to the power rebate for a period of three years with effect from 11-04-1997. The Petitioner's request was however rejected by the functionaries of Respondent No. 3. The Petitioner has evidently approached Respondent No. 2, who, in turn, has addressed letter, dated 08-04-2003, to Respondent No. 1 in the backdrop of rejection of the Petitioner's request by the functionaries of Respondent No. 3 and requested Respondent No. 1 to issue necessary orders for providing 25% power rebate for a period of three years atleast from 15-07-1998, if not from 11-04-1997, in terms of T.O.O.(Comml) No. 36, dated 08-03-1999. When there was no response to the said letter, the Petitioner approached Respondent No. 1, who, in turn, called for a report from Respondent No. 3. As the Petitioner has not succeeded in getting the rebate in power tariff, it has filed the present Writ Petition.