HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A. RAMALINGESWARA RAO WRIT PETITION No.13344 of 2006
Date: June 24, 2014
Between:
Siddhartha Academy of General & Technical Education, rep. by its Secretary, Vijayawada.
… Petitioner And
1. The Director, Commercial and Co-ordination, APTRANSCO, Hyderabad & 2 others.
… Respondents * * * HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A. RAMALINGESWARA RAO WRIT PETITION No.13344 of 2006
O R D E R:
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and none appears for the respondents.
2. The petitioner is stated to be a charitable society registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860, with registered No.45 of 1975, formed with an object to provide educational, charitable and social welfare activities to the poor students. It established 14 educational institutions and imparting education in various courses and carrying on charitable activities at different places of Krishna District. Many of the educational institutions of the petitioner society are receiving aid from the State Government and Central Bodies and are receiving 100% salary grant from the Government of Andhra Pradesh, Department of Higher Education. The Income Tax authorities have also granted tax exemption under Section 80 G of the Income Tax Act, 1961 to the donations made to the petitioner society and it was being renewed every year. All the educational institutions of the petitioner society are located at various places of Krishna District and have been receiving power supply under different electricity service connections. All the service connections are given under Category-II. While so, the Andhra Pradesh Electricity Regulatory Commission (APERC) passed orders dated 18.06.2001 in R.P.No.7 of 2001 in O.P.No.347 of 2000 holding that such of the educational institutions which are charitable institutions and which are for public benefit and not for profit were also eligible for payment of electricity charges under Category-VII. Only private educational institutions have been shifted from Category-VII to LT Non-Domestic Category-II. Accordingly, the DISCOMS were directed to regulate power tariff of the individual junior colleges as per the tariff orders already issued by the Commission.
3. Pursuant to the said orders of the APERC, the first respondent issued guidelines on 12.05.2002 to the Chairman & Managing Director, CPDCL, NPDCL, EPDCL and SPDCL in order to review the cases for application of appropriate tariff. Accordingly, SPDCL, Tirupati, issued a Circular Memo dated 23.05.2002 reiterating the guidelines for application of appropriate tariff to respective educational institutions.
4. The petitioner society, on the assumption that it is eligible for Category-VII consumer, submitted a representation in O.C.No.1140/2003 dated 21.05.2003 to the Superintending Engineer-Operations, APSPDCL, Vijayawada, seeking to revise the category of the institutions to be treated under Category-VII instead of Category-II. This was followed by another representation in O.C.No.764/2005 dated 12.07.2005 giving particulars of the service connections held by its educational institutions. Yet another representation was submitted to the Chairman & Managing Director of SPDCL, Tirupati in O.C.No.2449/2005 dated 13.12.2005 reiterating the request for categorization from Category-II to Category-VII. Ultimately, the Chief General Manager, APSPDCL, Tirupati, issued Memo No.CGM/Expr/GM(R)/SAO/D.No.180/2006 dated 18.05.2006, negativing the request for change of category from II to VII in respect of the petitioner society on the ground that the petitioner society was collecting donations from students and running on profit basis. No reasons were assigned in the said order in support of the conclusion that the society was running on profit basis.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the balance sheet of the society clearly shows that whatever donations or other amounts received by the society are being utilized for the purpose of development of the educational institutions only and no amount is taken out from the society for the benefit of any individual member and the society is being run on no profit and no loss basis. Challenging the order dated 18.05.2006, the present writ petition was filed by the petitioner.
6. It is clear from the order of the Andhra Pradesh Electricity Regulatory Commission that tariff proposals for 2001-2002 were stated as follows:
“The LT general purpose category covers places of worship, Govt. schools, charitable institutions, (including Public Charitable Trusts and Societies registered under the Societies Registration Act running educational and medical relief institutions running on a no profit basis). Rates as notified for FY 2000-01 are retained as it is.”
After looking into the said proposal, the Commission opined that only private educational institutions are shifted to LT Non- Domestic category. But the educational institutions which are charitable institutions and which are for public benefit and not for profit were held to be eligible for payment of electricity charges as per category-VII.
7. It is clear from the said order that if an educational institution is run by a charitable institution for public benefit and not for profit, it is eligible for being treated under Category-VII. Certain guidelines were issued by the Director Commercial & Co- Ordination, AP Transco, Vidyut Soudha, Hyderabad, on 12.05.2002 and those guidelines were reiterated by the SPDCL in its Circular Memo dated 23.05.2002. The respondents ought to have examined the issue of the petitioner society with reference to the order passed by the APERC on 18.06.2001 and the subsequent guidelines issued by the DISCOMS. But the impugned order negativing the request of the petitioner society was passed on the ground that it was collecting donations from students and running on profit basis. The said conclusion has no basis as could be seen from the order.
8. In the circumstances, the impugned Memo No.CGM/Expr/GM(R)/SAO(R)D.No.180/2006 dated 18.05.2006 of the Chief General Manager, APSPDCL, is set aside and the respondents are directed to re-consider the representations of the petitioner dated 21.05.2003, 12.07.2005 and 13.12.2005 in the light of the APERC order dated 18.06.2001 and the guidelines of the DISCOMS dated 12.05.2002 and 25.03.2002 and pass appropriate order, if necessary, by giving personal hearing to the petitioner within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
9. Subject to the above observation, the writ petition is allowed. Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand dismissed in consequence. No costs.
A. RAMALINGESWARA RAO, J Date: June 24, 2014 BSB
68 HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A. RAMALINGESWARA RAO
WRIT PETITION No.13344 of 2006
Date: June 24, 2014
BSB