Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

21. In (Andhra Pradesh State Electricity Board Vidyut Soudha v. Gowthami Solvent Oils) (D.B.), it was held that a direction to charge tariff concessional rate of Rs. 50/- per Horse Power for agricultural pump-sets is one relating to policy matter and it was competent for the Government to issue. It was also high-lighted therein that adirection issued under Section 78-A should be consistent with the provisions of the Act and the Rules and any direction issued contrary to any particular provision of the Act or the Rules would be outside the purview of the Rules and Section 78-A of the Act.

23. In (Real Food Products Ltd. v. A.P. State Electricity Board), the nature and scope of powers under Section 78-A of the Electricity (Supply) Act, 1948 came up for consideration before the Supreme Court. This was rendered on appeals filed from the decision of the Division Bench of the Andhra Pradesh High Court (supra). It was held therein, where the direction of the State as in that case was to fix a concessional tariff for agricultural pump-sets at a flat rate per Horse Power, it does relate to a question of policy which the Board must follow. At the same time, it was clarified that however, in indicating the specific rate in a given case, the action of the State Government may be in excess of the power of giving a direction on the question of policy, which the Board, if its conclusion be different may not be obliged to be bound by.