High Court · 2025

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith' the High Court may be pleased to kindly issue an appropriate writ' order or direction declaring the impugned Show Cause Lr' No ADE/OP/GMDL/F'HT/D'No 904124-25' dt' 15tl1t2[25of the sth Respondent with regard to the power connection No' SGR 1145 hetd by the Petitioner as ex'facie illegal' arbitrary' without authority of law and jurisdiction apart from being contrary to the provisions of Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act' 1957 and the Rules made thereunder and consequently quash the same, in the interest of mineral development' law and justice. OF PetitionunderSectionl5'lCPCprayingthatinthecircumstancesstatedin the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition' the High Court may be pleased to kindly suspend the operation of the impugned Show Cause Lr' No ADE / OP / GMDL / F. HT / D. No. 904 t 24-25' dt' 15tO112025 of the sth Respondent herein issued to the Petitioner Firm with regard to its power supply connection No' SGR ll45heldinthenameofPetitionerFirminSy.No.l4l,l42andl44ofKha|ipally Village, Jinnaram Mandal, Sangareddy District' failing which it may result in irreparable loss and hardship to the interest of the Petitioner Firm' F Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition' the High Court may be pleased to kindly to stay the disconnection of power supply connection No SGR 1145 of the Petitioner Firm pursuant to the impugned Show Cause Lr' No ADE / OP / GMDL / F.HT/D.No.904t24-2s,dt.lst}lt2o2'ofthe5thRespondenthereinissuedto thePetitionerFirmwithregardtoit'stwoStoneCrusherunitspresentinSy.No. 141, 142 and 144 of Khajipally Village' Jinnaram Mandal' Sangareddy District till the reply letter dt. 19tO112O25 of the Petitioner is properly and validly considered in accordance with law' failing which it may result in irreparable loss and hardship to the interest of the Petitioner Firm' 30F 2025

1. The Southern Power Distribution Companv of Telanoana Ltd. ( TGSPDCL). Rep. by it's Chairman and Managing Oiiector, Mint Co-mpound, Hyderabad. '' 2. The Superintendent Engineer (Operations), Operation Circle, TGSpDCL. Sangareddy Main Rd, Telecom Colony, ShantiNagar, Sangareddy.

3. The Divisiolql . Engineer (Operations), TGSPDCL, Sangareddy Circle, Patancheru Division, Phase-|, Nethajingar, Bandlaguda Ro-ad, P6tancheru 502 319. The Asst. Divisional Engineer, Operation, TGSPDCL, Sangareddy tircle, Patancheru Gummadidala Sub-Station- Gummadidala Sub-Division, Division, Near 33/1 1KV 4

5. The Assistant Engineer (Operations), TGSPDCL, Jinnawaram-solakpally Road, Sub-Station, Jinnaram, Ootla, Sangareddy District. ...PETITIONERS/RESPONDENTS No.2to6 D 1. M/s. Gangothri Metql lndustry, Rep. by its Managing Reddy, having its office at . H. No. 6-3-2521A,8 and 9 Castle Apartments, Erramanzil Colony, Hyderabad. Partner - M. Anand Flat No. 104, Mount ... RESPONDENT/WRIT PETITIONER 2. The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Energy Department, B.R. Ambedkar Secretariat Buildings, Saifabad, Hyderabad.

3. The Asst. Director of Mines and Geology, Plot No. 37, Prashanthi Nagar, Sanga Reddy.

4. The Deputy Director of Mines and Geology, Nizamabad Region, H. No. 6-2- 2O0 183 / C, Subhash Nagar. Niizamabad.

5. The Director of Mines and Geology, My Home Sarovar Plaza, Plot No. 203 and 204, 2nd Floor, H. No. 5-922. Shapurwadi, Adarsh Nagar, Near Secretariat Road, Hyderabad 500 029.

6. The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary (Mines), Dr. B.R. Ambedkar Secretariat Buildings, Saifabad, Hyderabad. ...RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS 1 & 7 to 10 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to vacate the Order in Order dated 30.01.2025 Passed in |:A.NO.2 ot 2025 in WP.No.2598 of 2025, in interests of justice and to pass such other and further orders. Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI PANNALA SRINIVAS Counsel for the Respondent No.1 : Gp FOR ENERGY Counsel for Respondents No.2to6 : SRI N.SREEDHAR REDDY, SC FOR TSSPDCL Counsel for Respondents No.7tol0 : Gp FOR MINES & GEOLOGY The Court made the following: ORDER I .4) IN THE HIGH COURT FIOR THE STATE OF TELAITGANA AT HTDEF.ABAD HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NAGESH BHEEMAPAI(A WRIT PETITIOI{ No- 2598 oF 2O25 w.9.20.25 Between: M/s Gangotri Metal Industry, Rep. by its Managing Part"ner Sri N{. Anand Reddy- .. Petitioner And State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretiary, Enerry Department & 9 others ..Respondents ORDER: Heard Learned Cor:nsel for Petitioner Sri Pannala Srinivas, learned Government Pleader for Mines & Geolory and Learned Standing counsel for TGSPDCL Sri N.Sreedhar Reddy. Show Cause Notice dated i5.O1 .2025 issued by the

2. 5tr Respondent - Assistant Divisional Engineer with regard to 2 power connection No. SGR 1145 held by petitioner is under challenge in this Writ Petition.

3. Petitioner contends that it is having three quarry leases for extraction of Mineral-Building Stone and Road Metal in survey No. L44 of Khazipally village, Jinnaram Mandal, Sanga Reddy District; the 7ti, respondent issued work order Proceedings in their favour dated 21.11.2025,22.07.2022 and '22.07.2022 and. accordingly, they have been carrying out the work. Surprisingly, it is stated, the 7th Respondent issued Demand Notice dated 31.O5.2O24 for payment of Rs. 1O,7O,O4,2641- towards normal Seigniorage fee plus penalty pltis permit fee plus DMFT plus SMET plus IT alleging that petitioner extracted excess quantity of 36,766 MTs from within the quarry lease area and also operated outside the quarry lease area and extracted 1,07.,691 MTs of Building Stone and transported the same without dispatch permit and payment of seigniorage fee and other taxes due to the state Government. tt is further contended that questioning the said demand notice, petitioner filed statutory Appeal under Rule 35 of T.S.M.M.C. Rules, 1996 before the gttt Respondent and the same is pending consideration. J

3.1. While so, the 5th respondent issued show cause notice dated 15.01 .2025 on the ground that the 9ft respondent issued letter dated 25.11 .2024 wherein quarry leases with certain lease IDs. were blocked by the Department of Mines and Geolory on ttre on line portal due to mineral revenue dues / violation of the terms and conditions to all such lease holders and directed TGSPDCL to immediately disconnect power supply to the default quarry leases including that of petitioner firm. Petitioner, it is stated, filed reply dated 19.01.2025 to the 5ft respondent duly enclosing a copy of the Appeal Application dated 28.L2.2O24 filed by them before the 9ft respondent. In view of the Appeal pending on the subject before the gth Respondent, the impugned notice dated 15.01.2025 is illegal and the said notice is without jurisdiction and with non- application of mind, according to petitioner.

4. In the counter filed on behalf of Respondents 2 to 6, it is stated, letter dated 11.L2.2O24 was received from the 7tt' respondent stating that the 9th respondent addressed the letter dated 25.LL.2O24 to the effect that certain lease I.Ds. were blocked by the Department of Miens & Geologr in the on line portal due to certain violations committed by lease holders and directed to take immediate disconnection power supply by i I ',&-; 4 --iF!r!i!Bt TGSPDCL to the default quarry leases, based on which, the 7th respondent requested to disconnect power supply to HT Service No. SGR 1145 of petitioner through the 3'a respondent uide letter datefl 21.12.2024, based on which, notice was issued to petitioner on 15.0 1.2025 giving 15 days' time for disconnection of power supply, after completion of that time, power supply w-as disconnected as they have not received any further communicill.ion from the 7e respondent.

5. In the counter filed by the 7ft respondent, it is stated that petitioner is a defaulter of Mineral Revenue Dues to the Department and demand notices were issued to them for payment of Rs. 1o,7o,o4,2641- towards normal Seigniorage fee and penalty and other fees like Permit Fee, DMF, SMET and Income Tax. It is contended that as per circular instructions issued by the Director of Mines & Geolory dated 12.02.2024, the technical staff of the Assistant Director of Mines & Geologr, Sanga Reddy along with empanelled agency, M/s Universal Mining Services inspected the quarries of petitioner on 20.01 .2024 and conducted E.T-S. Survey based on the approved DGPS map and submitted report. It is noticed that there have been violations in excavation and transportation of mineral from the quarry leased area and outside the leased , 5 I area and. it is found that petitioner excavated more than 96,776 MTs of metal within the quarry leased area and more than L,o7,691 MTs of metal outside the quarry leased area. Therefore, a Show Cause Notice was issued to petitioner by the 7th Respondent dated 13.03.2024 to which the former requested to furnish the relevant documents including ETS survey reports which were also furnished by letter dated 22.04.2024, but however, as no reply was received from petitioner, the 7ft Respondent issued the Demand Notice dated

31.05.2024 for making payment of Rs. 10,70,04,2641-' Since petitioner has not paid the amount as per demand notice, steps were proposed for recovery of the said amount under the provisions of Revenue Recovery Act. It was stated that simultaneously, a letter was addressed to Respondent No.3 for disconnection of power supply to petitioner unit and there is no illegality or irregularity in the same. Theieafter, petitioner filed Appeal before the 9fr Respondent. The letter to TGSPDCL was addressed on 1L.L2.2O24 whereas the Appeal was Iiled on 28.12.2024, hence, the action taken by the respondent authorities was not premature, as stated by petitioner.

6. Learned Standing Counsel for TGSPDCL argued that impugned proceedings issued by the 5ft Respondent are 6 only in the nature of show cause notice, requesting petitioner to show cause as to why power supply shall not be disconnected to its unit in t ie',r' of the letter addressed by the .Assistant Director of Mines & Geologr and that no Writ Petition would lie against the said notice. It is submitted that petitioner was at liberty to file its explanation to the Show Cause Notice and if any such expianation is filed, the same would be considered in accordance with law and orders would be passed. It is further submitted that as no reply was submitted by petitioner, their Service Connection was disconnectr:d. Leartred Stand.ing Counsel further argued that in any event, a. show cause notice cannot be impugned in the Writ Petition liled under Article 226 of the Constitution and it is always oprlr to petitioner to submit its reply. Repliring to the same,

7. learned counsel for Petitioner submits that petitioner submitted its reply on .

19.01 .2025 by Speed Post, therefore, Respondents cannot contend that no reply is filed.

8. This Court has anxiously considered the submissions made by all the learned counsel. Undisputedly, this Writ Petition is liled impugning the show cause notice and apprehending disconnection of power supply. This Court does I 7 \ i i not see any reason for interfering with t]..e impugned show cause notice. The Honble Supreme Court as well as this Cdurt, time and again, has held that a writ under Article 226 of the Constitution cannot be filed interdicting show cause notice until it is shown that issuance of such notice was without jurisdiction. g. Learned counsel for Petitioner has relied on the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in A.V. Venkatesutoroln, Collectnr of C';.tstoms, Bombag a. Ra;mcha;nd Sobhral Wadhwani' and contends that where there is a complete lack of jurisdiction in any oflicer or authority who takes the impugned action, the writ jurisdiction should be exercised. tn this case, petitioner failed to prove that the Authority has no jurisdiction to issue the show cause notice. However, it is to be observed that in the counter

10. filed on behalf of Respondents 2 to 6, it is stated that show cause notice was issued to petitioner on 15.O1.2025 giving 15 days' time for disconnection of power supply and after completion of 15 days'time, power supply was disconnected to petitioner's service connection. In that view of the matter, 'ArR t961 sc 1506 ( \ t I 8 since it is the contention of petitioner that they hled reply on

19.01.2025 to the impugned show cause notice, this Court deems it appropriate to direct respondent authorities to consider the same and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law.

11. In the result, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing the respondent authorities to consider the reply dated

19.O1.2025 said to have been submitted by petitioner and pass appropriate orders, duly observing the principles of natural justice, including personal hearing of petitioner, in accordance with law. The said process shall be completed within eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Till such time, respondent authorities are directed not to take any coercive steps against petitioner's Service Connection. No costs.

12. Consequently, the miscellaneous Applications, if any shall stand closed. /TRUE COPY// SD/. L. VIJAYA LAXMI ASSISTANT REGISTRAR (y SECTION OFFICER To,

1. The Principal Secretary, Energy Department, B.R. Ambedkar Secretariat, Telangana State, Saifabad, Hyderabad 500 004.

2. The Chairman and Managing Director, Southern Power Distribution Company of Telangana Ltd. ( TGSPDCL), 6-1-50,Mint Compound, Hyderabad-s0O 063. \ 3 l:;r:'.:t?'i,.,ffi1,*"fi5, =':?J:8ff J3ffi:'S,i"',1i,*?B3i?'.T"n?il;'J?r,"o"i"??:"'-; 502001.

4.TheDivisionalEngineer(op.erations),TGSPDCL,SangareddyCircle' Patancheru Divis'ron] Phase-l' (&ffiiilUar" ainotagdoa Ro'-ao' Patancheru 502 319. 5 rhe As-st Divisionar eng!!e9r;, offi:if";:.rngft?S11"'iu":lo-?lyi'1?t v Eti'f;*d,r"s3,lt-Tii#" s'l'5'. Road, Sub-Station, Jinnarar unn"il.l'o6tf 'a'SingZ'edOy District' 502 31 9' 6.TheAssistantEngineer(operations),-TGSPDCL.Jinnawaram.Solakpally 7. The Asst. Director of Mines and Geology, Plot No' 37, Prashanthi Nagar' Resion' H' No' 6-2- Sanga ReddY, 502 001 '

8. The De-putv Director of Mines. S?:-"r"r"J3tJO$=.lTabad v' )od f8{ ld, subh"sh Nagar' Nii; e rhe Director or Mines and c.eorffiy, S,ii[i;3t1:ifi?#' fi:"J#o v' il 2oa, 2nd Floor, H N9.. 203 Siit"Iiriit Roao, Hvderabad 500 029' secretariat Buirdinss'

10.rhe Principjr.r,S:Ul'r:grlY,ir?'JaBl.?S $loeot<ar Telangana Sta II.OneCCtoSRIPANNALASRINIVAS'Advocate'[OPUC] 12.Two ccs to GP FOR ENERGY, High court for the state of Telangana' [oUT] I3.oneCCtoSRIN.SREEDHARREDDY,SCFoRTGSPDCL/TRANSCo. IoPUCI l4.TwoCCstoGPFoRM.t!.Es&GEoLoGY,HighCourtfortheStateof '-'i"frngana at HYderabad' IOUTI

15.Two CD Copies. w'"" r: ? j-. HIGH COURT DATED:05/1 212025 \ \ I t ( ( CC TODAY 'w?|' HE1 g1 0t[, 2$25 * .L,\ R WP.No.2598 of 2025 DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS 1t,l