ORDER : Challa Kodanda Ram, J. The petitioner challenges clause (3) of the Notes in Annexure-D - Schedule of Retail Tariff Rates and Terms & Conditions and in respect of the Four Distribution Companies for the financial year 2006-07. 2. The brief averments in the Writ Petition are that: the petitioner is an industry engaged in manufacture of Billets with its unit at Bolaram Industrial Estate, Medak District. It is availing electrical energy from the 2nd respondent Distribution Company under an agreement entered into with it. The petitioner's electricity connection is categorized as HT Category-I (HT Industrial Consumer) with a contracted maximum demand of 9900 KVA at 33 KV voltage. For the months of May, June and July 2006, the petitioner was issued consumption bills for a total units of 51,93,920 which included total energy consumed for lights and fans. The petitioner was billed 15% of total consumption 51,93,920 units at a higher tariff of Rs. 4.40 paisa as against the normal tariff of Rs. 3.10 paisa as applicable for HD category-I. The charges levied were in accordance with the tariff notification as approved by the 5th respondent in terms of the Electricity Act, 2003 (for short, 'the Act'). It is the case of the petitioner that charging at a higher rate of Rs. 4.40 ps. Per unit merely on account of the fact that it had not segregated lights and fans consumption, at 15% of the energy consumed by the industry, on a notional basis, is totally irrational and there is no discernible classification and justifiable reason for charging at a higher rate as the petitioner's consumption is for industrial undertaking. It is the case of the petitioner that even if it used fans and lights for 24 hours, the maximum power that could be consumed for three months would be not more than 30,720 KWH for which a sum of Rs. 1,35,163/- would be liable to be paid as against the illegal demand of Rs. 10,12,815.10 Ps. 3. The respondents have filed their counter-affidavit stating that the amounts charged are in accordance with the statutory tariff notification, as directed by the A.P. Electricity Regulatory Commission (A.P.E.R.C.). 4. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner Sri D.V. Nagarjuna Babu, who, reiterating the contents of the affidavit, would further submit that charging at higher rate of Rs. 1.30 ps. over and above Rs. 3.10 ps. 4. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner Sri D.V. Nagarjuna Babu, who, reiterating the contents of the affidavit, would further submit that charging at higher rate of Rs. 1.30 ps. over and above Rs. 3.10 ps. as chargeable to HT Category-I is illegal and irrational. 5. At the outset, it may be noted that in terms of the 2003 Act read with Andhra Pradesh Electricity Reform Act, 1998, the APERC is competent to fix the tariff for various consumers, taking into consideration the parameters as specified in terms of Section 62 of the 2003 Act. For the year 2006-07, the tariff notification was issued, which includes Annexure-D, which contained the impugned clause. There is no dispute that the petitioner is availing power under HT Category -I. The impugned notification so far as it is relevant may be extracted as under: H.T. Category-I This tariff is applicable for supply to all H.T. Industrial Consumers. Industrial purpose shall mean manufacturing, processing and/or preserving goods for sale, but shall not include Shops, Business Houses, Offices, Public Buildings, Hospitals, Hotels, Hostels, Choultries, Restaurants, Clubs, Theatres, Cinemas, Railway Stations and other similar premises not withstanding any manufacturing, processing or preserving goods for sale. The Water Works of Municipalities and Corporations and any other Government organizations come under this category. The Information Technology Units identified and approved by the Consultative Committee on IT Industry (CCITI) constituted by Govt. of AP also fall under this category. Industry - General Demand Charges & Energy Charges Demand Charges Rs/KVA/month of Billing Demand Energy Charges Paise/unit 132 kv and above 250 280 33 kv 230 310 11 kv 195 330 Important: (i) The billing demand shall be the maximum demand recorded during the month of 80% of the contracted demand whichever is higher. (ii) Energy charges will be billed on the basis of actual Energy consumption of 50 units per KVA of billing demand whichever is higher. (iii) FSA will be extra as applicable. Ferro Alloy Unts Demand Charges & Energy Charges Demand Charges Energy Charges Rs/KVA/month of Billing deamnd Paise/unit Ferro Alloys NIL 255 Conditions 1. Guaranteed energy off-take at 85% annual load factor on Contracted Maximum Demand or Actual Demand whichever ;is higher. The energy falling short of 85% Load Factor will be billed as deemed consumption. 2. The consumer shall draw his entire power requirement from DISCOMs only. 3. Not eligible for HT-I Load Factor incentive. Guaranteed energy off-take at 85% annual load factor on Contracted Maximum Demand or Actual Demand whichever ;is higher. The energy falling short of 85% Load Factor will be billed as deemed consumption. 2. The consumer shall draw his entire power requirement from DISCOMs only. 3. Not eligible for HT-I Load Factor incentive. FSA will be extra as applicable. Notes: (1) Incentive. (a) The following incentives are applicable for HT-Category-I(A) consumers: Load Factor (LF) Discount applicable on the energy rates More than 50% up to 70% 25% on the energy above 50% LF More than 70% 25% on the energy above 40% LF (b) The incentive scheme is applicable for the consumption with the above mentioned Load factors. This scheme will be effective till 31 March 2007. (2) Consumption of energy for lights and fans in factory: The consumption of energy for lights and fans in the factory premises in excess of 10% of total consumption shall be billed at 440 paise per unit provided lights and fans consumption in the unit is separately metered. (3) Case of non-segregation of fans and lights In case segregation of light and fan loads has not been done, 15% of the total energy consumption shall be billed at 440 paise per unit and the balance units shall be charged at the corresponding energy tariff under HT category-I(A). (4) Colony Consumption The consumption of energy exclusively for the residential colony/township in a month, separately metered with meters installed by the consumer and tested and sealed by the Licensee shall bel billed at 350 paise per unit. 6. The above-quoted tariff notification would make it clear that a consumer falling within HT Category-I would be charged for their industrial consumption involving manufacture, at Rs. 3.10 ps. and they are also required to segregate their consumption towards fans and lights in the factory premises, by installing a separate meter. If they install a separate meter, the consumption in excess would alone be charged at Rs. 4.40 ps. per unit, as otherwise, the tariff notification stipulates consumer to be charged at 15% of total energy on a prescriptive basis at Rs. 4.40 ps. per unit, treating the said consumption as falling within the HT Category-I(A). Here it is to be noted that it cannot be said that there is no classification in treating the consumption for manufacture and consumption for lighting and other purposes. 4.40 ps. per unit, treating the said consumption as falling within the HT Category-I(A). Here it is to be noted that it cannot be said that there is no classification in treating the consumption for manufacture and consumption for lighting and other purposes. The fact that in terms of para 2 of the Notes, up to 10% of the total consumption is treated as part of the industrial consumption itself would indicate that there is a discernible criteria adopted and further, the petitioner has a choice of installing a separate meter, thereby, it can avoid billing of the consumption being charged at a higher rate. It is the specific assertion of the petitioner that its consumption is falling less than 10% of the total industrial consumption. However, there is no denial that the petitioner had not chosen to install a separate meter, hence, its case would fall within Para 3 of the Notes in terms of the notification. The ERC, being a statutory body, and the notification, fixing different categories by way of rational classification, cannot be faulted and there is no irrationality in the impugned clause, inasmuch as the petitioner, to avoid payment at a higher rate, always has an option to abide by the tariff conditions by installing a meter for segregation of consumption of energy for lights and fans. The petitioner, having not done so, cannot complain and cannot challenge the tariff notification. There being no irrationality, this Court finds no merit in the Writ Petition and the same is accordingly, dismissed. No costs. stands vacated.