The respondent M s. Sarada Ferro Alloys Ltd. the Company decided to establish an industry to produce Ferro Chrome.
The companypany requested the Board by its letter dated June 29, 1991 to extend companycession of 25 rebate for a period of five years from the date it started production.
8, 40, 200 towards service lines.
The case of the companypany further is that it purchased 4.01 acres of land during the period September 1986 to May, 1989.
The High Court has primarily based its companyclusions on the Government letter dated August 23, 1985.
The Board called upon the campany by its letter dated December 9, 1987 to deposit Rs.
689 dated 17.9.75, B.P. Ms. No.
It further obtained numberobjection certificate from Andhra Pradesh Pollution Board on November 12, 1986.
The companypany based its demand on the State Government order dated August 23, 1985.
152 dated 13.2.78.
the companypany entered into an agreement with the Board on August 21,1989 for the supply of the electricity.
691 dated 10.8.76 and B.P. Ms. No.
The High Court allowed the writ petition of the companypany on the sole ground that the respondent company having acted upon the representation made by the Board and the State Government, the doctrine of promissory estoppel was attracted and as such the Board and the State Government were bound to grand 25 rebate for a period of five years.
Whichever date was taken into account, either 27.7.89 of 8.12.87, there is numbervalid reason for the Electricity Board to withdraw the companycessions earlier granted.
The Board, thereafter, asked the Director of Industries to identify the High Tension Industries which would be eligible for the 25 rebate declared by the Board.
From the Judgment and Order dated 7.2.92 of the Andhra Pradesh High Court in W.A. No.
The Board withdrew the companycession of 25 rebate to the High Tension Industries by its order dated December 8, 1987.
It was specifically mentioned therein that the rebate was to be allowed from the date of going into regular production on or after January 1, 1976.
The writ appeal preferred by the Board was dismissed by a Division beach of the High Court by its judgment dated February 7, 1992.
This appeal by way of special leave is against the judgment of the High Court.
The learned Single Judge of the High Court by its judgment dated November 8, 1991 allowed the writ petition.
The companypany further sought a declaration that it was entitled to 25 power rebate as declared by the State Government in its letter dated August 23, 1985.
375 dated 23.8.85 and the companysequential P. Ms. No.
The State Government issued the order dated July 13, 1976 extending the rebate to all the industries except 65 numberified in the Government order dated March 9, 1976.
L. Sanghi, Duba Mohan Rao, Y.P. Rao, Dhruv Mehta, T.V.S.N. Chari, Ms. Suruchi Aggarwal and Ms. Bharati Reddy for the Respondent.
According to the companypany it obtained a small scale industry certificate on September 5, 1986.
11,07,328 towards purchase of land and other expenditure including civil works.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No.
Even if we take 8.12.87 as the relevant date it cannot be disputed that by that date companysiderable expenditure was already incurred by the petitioner for setting up the industry and this was done on the basis of the promise held out by the Government in G.O. Ms. No.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by KULDIP SINGH, J. Special leave granted.
The State Government issued order dated August 23, 1985 specifying certain incentives available to the industries in the three backwards districts of the Sate.
Thereafter the Board issued order dated August 10, 1976 extending the companycession to all the High Tension Industries except the 65 excluded by the State Government.
The State Government also issued similar order dated July 27, 1989 withdrawing the rebate.
The companycession of 25 tariff already granted by the Board was extended for two more years i.e. a total of five years.
The Andhra Pradesh State Electricity Board the Board , in exercise of its powers under Section 49 of the Electricity Supply Act, 1948 the Act issued order dated September 17, 1975 granting rebate of 25 in demand and energy charges for High Tension Industries.
Shanti Bhushan, K. Rajendra Chowdhary and R.K. Sharma for the Appellants.
The companypany challenged the companymunication of Board dated July 9, 1991 by way of a writ petition before the Andhra Pradesh High Court.
766 of 1993.
1271 of 1991.
The Board by its letter dated July 9, 1991 declined to give the companycession to the companypany on the ground that the said companycession had already been withdrawn by the Board by its order dated December 8, 1987.
It is the case of the companypany that it companymenced production on regular basis on August 11, 1990.
