IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) PRESENT: THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY FRIDAY, THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF AUGUST, TWO THOUSAND NINE WRIT PETITION No.10677 of 2000 Between: M/s. Irasco Stone Crushing Industry, Rep., by its Proprietor, Mohammad Rasheed, Seethapathi Colony, Picket, Secunderabad. … Petitioner And Transmission Corporation of A.P. Ltd., Rep., by its Managing Director, Vidyut Soudha, Khairatabad, Hyderabad & others. … Respondents Counsel for the petitioner : Sri D.V. Nagarjuna Babu Counsel for the respondents: Sri Anil Kumar for the SC for A.P. Transmission This Court made the following: THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.10677 of 2000 ORDER:- This writ petition is filed for a Mandamus to declare the action of the respondents in insisting upon the petitioner to pay development charges on 30 KVA for converting its high tension service to Low Tension category-III(B) with the connected load of 150 Horse Power (for short, “the HP”), as illegal, arbitrary and contrary to the terms and conditions of the supply of the respondents. The petitioner, which is a crushing unit, was a high tension consumer of the respondents with a contracted maximum demand (CMD) of 120 KVA and with a connected load of 160 HP and 5 KV lighting load. Vide proceedings dated 09.05.2000 of respondent No.2, the petitioner was permitted to convert its power supply from High Tension (for short, ‘HT’) to Low Tension (for short, ‘LT’) with 150 HP as connected load. Clause 3 (vi) of the said letter stipulated the condition that the petitioner has to pay development charges of Rs.1,500/- per KVA on the balance 30 KVA demand, as its CMD under the LT category-III(B) is 150 KVA, whereas its CMD under HT category-I was 120 KVA only. This condition is assailed in this writ petition. Sri D.V. Nagarjuna Babu, learned counsel for the petitioner strenuously contended that the terms and conditions framed by the respondents in exercise of the powers under Section 49 of the Electricity (Supply) Act, 1948 envisaged parameters for conversion of HT into KVA. He relied on condition No.2.14 of the said conditions to buttress his submission that on such conversion, the petitioner’s contracted demand of 120 KVA could be equivalent to 156 HP. The learned counsel submitted that since the petitioner was permitted to have the contracted load of 150 HP only, the conversion of category from HT to LT did not result in release of any additional load and that therefore there was no need for the petitioner to pay development charges. Per contra, Sri Anil Kumar, learned counsel representing the learned Standing counsel for the respondents submitted that since the petitioner opted for coming under LT category III(B), which was an optional tariff with special conditions, it cannot rely upon the general terms and conditions framed by the respondents. He has taken the Court through the conditions subject to which a consumer is permitted to come under the said category and submitted that the demand for development charges for 30 KVA is in conformity with the said conditions. I have carefully considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. It is not in dispute that the petitioner had the connected load of 160 HP with 120 KVA of CMD as HT consumer. Under condition No.8, the respondents are empowered to collect development charges for release of new and additional loads both in respect of LT and HT categories. As noted above, it is the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that since the petitioner already had 160 HP of connected load as HT consumer, which was equivalent to more than 120 KVA CMD, conversion did not involve release of additional load. In this context, it is relevant to refer to the conditions pertaining to LT category III (B) to the extent they are relevant, which are reproduced hereunder: “L.T. Category – III(B) – Industrial-Optional Category This optional tariff is applicable to Small Scale Industrial Units which have been licensed by the Industries Department as bona fide small Scale Industries and given registration number under Small Scale Industries Registration Scheme with connected loads above 75 HP and upto 150 HP and who wish to avail supply at Low Tension subject to the conditions mentioned hereunder. The applicants should indicate their consent for these conditions, in the application for LT supply. The existing LT Category-III consumers who come under SSI category and who were sanctioned LT supply for connected loads above 75 HP and upto 125 HP subject to certain conditions prior to 15.07.1987, and who did not switch over to HT supply, may also come under this category duly complying with these conditions. Rates: Fixed Charges: Rs.15/HP/Month of contracted load Energy Charges: For all unit consumer/month 360 Ps/Unit Conditions: (i) The maximum Connected Load under this Category shall not exceed 150 HP including incidental lighting load of 5%. The contracted load shall be the connected load required by the consumer and as specified in the agreement as per sanction accorded for the service. (ii) The Contracted Load in HP shall be treated as the Contracted Demand in KVA. (iii) The consumer should erect his own Distribution Transformer and structure initially along with necessary switchgear. The transformer will be maintained by the Board. (iv) For new/additional loads the consumer has to pay Development charges and Service Line Charges as per Board Rules as applicable for HT Industrial consumers.” A reading of the above clause shows that it was purely optional. Condition No. (ii) stipulates that the contracted load in HP shall be treated as the contracted demand in KVA. Condition No. (iv) envisages that for new/additional loads the consumer has to pay development charges and service line charges as per Board rules as applicable to HT industrial consumers. While ordinarily condition No. 2.14 is applicable for conversion of CMD into connected load, the said condition cannot be said to apply to the consumers, who opt to come under LT category III(B), referred to above. This category is created for those whose contracted demand/connected load is in excess of the demand/load prescribed for LT category consumers. But, still they are treated as LT category instead of being treated as HT category consumers. This is the obvious reason why conditions, which are separate and distinct from the ones that are envisaged for other categories of consumers, are prescribed for this category. By the application of condition No.(ii), the petitioner’s contracted load is treated as its contracted demand in KVA of CMD. Therefore, the 150 HP, which was the petitioner’s connected load, was treated as 150 KVA. As admittedly the petitioner paid development charges only for 120 KVA as HT consumer, the balance 30 KVA was treated as additional load under condition No. (iv) of the clause extracted above. In my considered view, the petitioner, having opted to come under this category, is bound by the conditions stipulated in the said category. In this view of the matter, I do not find any illegality in the impugned demand made by the respondents and the writ petition is accordingly dismissed. As a sequel to dismissal of the writ petition, WPMP.No.13579 of 2000 filed by the petitioner for interim relief is dismissed as infructuous. _____________________________ C.V. NAGARJUNA REDDY, J Date: 28.08.2009 ES