HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.9517 of 2004 Date : 08.10.2009 Between : M/s.Lakshmi Ice Industries, Narsapuram, rep. by its Proprietor. …..Petitioner And Eastern Power Distribution Company of A.P. Ltd., Visakhapatnam, rep. by its Chief General Manager & others. …..Respondents HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.9517 of 2004 ORDER : The petitioner, which is a small scale industry, engaged in the business of manufacturing ice, has questioned the validity of the Demand Notice, dated 21.04.2004, issued in Letter No.CGM/ COMML & RAC/EPDCL/VSP/VI, by respondent No.1. 2. For manufacturing of ice, the petitioner-small scale industry has obtained electricity Service Connection from the Eastern Power Distribution Company of Andhra Pradesh Limited. It has incurred arrears on account of consumption charges to the tune of Rs.5,07,161.50 paise. The petitioner-industry became sick, and in view of the revival scheme notified by the Government for small scale industries, a Committee was constituted in this regard, which has made certain recommendations. So far as petitioner-industry is concerned, in the 17th meeting of the A.P.Small Scale Industries Revival Scheme, held on 24th of January 2004, the Committee has recommended for waiver of minimum charges during the closure period, apart from grant of 12 instalments for payment of current consumption charges. 3. In this writ petition, it is the grievance of the petitioner that inspite of such waiver of minimum charges and granting 12 instalments for payment of current consumption charges, respondents have issued the impugned Demand Notice, without extending the benefit of waiver of minimum charges, and also by granting only six instalments, contrary to the minutes of the meeting held on 24th January 2004. 4. In view of the provisions contained under the Electricity Act, 2003, if any concessions notified by the State are in the nature of subsidy as contemplated under Section 65 of the said Act, unless the Government compensate the Electricity Company, no direction, even if issued by the State Government, is operative, in view of the proviso to Section 65 of the Act. In that view of the matter, merely because there was a recommendation by the Revival Committee, it is not binding on the respondent-Electricity Company, so as to follow the same, in the absence of any compensation by the Government, to the extent of incentives notified for revival of the Unit. 5. For the aforesaid reasons, I do not find any merit in this writ petition, which is accordingly dismissed. No order as to costs. ______________________ R. SUBHASH REDDY, J 8th October 2009 ajr