High Court · 2025

Petition under A(icle 226 of lhe Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith' the High Court may be pleasedtoissueanappropriatewritorderordirectionmoreparticularlyoneinthe nature of writ of mandamus declaring the Letter No'SE/OP MDK/SAO/HT/D. No.479 dated 5.8.2009 addressed by the second respondent to the petitioner demanding to pay Rs- 15, 62,7941- towards CC charges due on 6.l.lgg3andsurchargethereonasillegal,arbitrary,andviolativeofprinciplesof natural justice and set aside the same and consequently direct the respondents '1 and 2 not to demand any amount from the petitione there ro recover the same rrom the respondents . "J;:ff1[::.1fl1.::: I.A. No: 10F2009( WPM P.N O:26058 oF2009) . petition under Sec the affidavit f,r"d i. ;;; direct the respondents , ^^,n'; :::":"" , disconnection of power ..' of the due demanded 5.8.2009 addressed o, ,n:not' the writ petition e second respondent t" ,il::::J::ff;::"5':1 the circumstances stated in Ine High court may be pleased to coercive steps including for non-payment ::[',.u|,ol:l,n:^:i ',. uno 2 not to take ar rpply connection given to tny Ietter No SE/o"'''tu 'ut't'oner Counsel for the petitioner: SRI VIVEK CHANDRA SEKHAR S i8i[i'^lJ:'#e Respondents: sRr N.sREEDHAR REDD' (sc FoR The Court made the following: ORDER I i t' , { i I i i , I I I I 1, 4 {

1. / i I i t, i i I THE HON,BLE SRI JUSTICE NAGESH BIIEEMAPAIG WRIT PETIT ION No.19 9A2 of 2009 ORDER: This Writ Petition is hled to declare the letter dated 05.O8.2009 issued by respondent No'2 to the Petitloner charges due on demanding to pay Rs'15 '62'794 I towards C'C iilegal, arbitrary and 06.O1.1993 and surcharge thereon' as vioiative of principles of natural justice and set aside the same Nos.l and 2 to not to and consequently, direct respondent demand any amount tiom the petitioner and if any due is there' to recover the same from respond'ent Nos 3 and 4'

2. None appeared for the petitioner' 3. Sri N- Sreedhar Reddy' learned Standing Counsei appeared for resPondent Nos' 1 arrd 2' 4. The petitioner' having acquired the iand admeasuring Acs.2.2Oguntas in Sy'No' 639' situated at Bonthapally Village and Gram Palchayat, Jinnaram Mandal' Medak District' through a public auction held' under Sectio n 29 of the State Financial Corporations Act, 1951' for a sale consideration of Rs.81,0O,OO0/- and paid the full amount' received a registered Sale Deed in his favour on 10'06'2004' The said sale 'deed ret. '.'-*t..', I ,: :. i 2 explicirly guararteed peaceful possession and that the subject property was free of all encumbralces, charges, ciaims or demands whatsoever as of the sale date. Subsequently, the petitioner apptied for a fresh HT power connection, dutifully paid the amounts as directed by respondent No.2 tou.ards development charges, service charges, and consumption deposit, and received pou'er supply without defauit. Surprisingiy, hve years 1ater, respondent No.2 demanded Rs. 15,62,794/_ on account ol-arrears ou'ed by the previous owner i.e. M/s. Global Drugs private Limited. Thereafter, the petitioner clarified to responclent No.2 that as per the ciauses 3 and S of the said Sale Deed, the petitioner is not liable for any liabilities predating the sale, and insisted that any such dues be recovered lrom the thircl,party sellers. Hou'ever, the respondents are insisting the petitioner to pay the demanded amount. Therefore, the petitioner fired the present Writ Petition.

5. Learned Standing Counsel for respondent Nos. 1 ar_rd 2 filed counter afhdavit stating that M/ s. Global Drugs private Limited defaulted on electricity charges totalling to Rs.6,37,g75/-. Despite multiple notices, dues remained unpaid arrd ultimately lead to disconne-ction and termination of HT service as per the terms and conditions of supply. It is stated that post_auction, respondent t l ww' 3 Nos. I arrd 2 issued. a fresh notice to M/s Global Drugs Private I,imitedinJune,2oogand,uponlearningofthepetitioner,s acquisition, sent the impugned letter dated 05-08-2009' grounding liability on Clause 8.4 of the General Terms & Conditions of Supply, which mand'ates sellers to clear dues before tralsfer and suspends new connections untii such dues are settled' It is stated that the judgment of Supreme Court in Telangana State SouthernPowerDistributionCompanyLimitedv.M/s Srigdhaa Beveragesl conhrms that electricity dues are statutory under the trlectricity Act, 2O03, and that DISCOMs/ Licensees have the right to collect the arrears of previous olvners from the subsequent purchasers' As the dues are statutory' not mere contractual obligations ar-rd enforceable uia Revenue Recovery proceedings, the petitioner's ciaim that it is not liabie is baseless' It is stated that according to respondent Nos l and 2' the petitioner cannot avoid liability and the supply granted to the petitioner was irregular and oversight-based' and they retain full right to recover dues ura Revenue Recovery Proceedings or sale of property. Therefore, the Writ Petition is said to be misconceived and the same is liable to be dismissed' T / ' (zozo) s scc qo+ 'I \ 4 ,

6. In the light of the binding precedent lajd don.n by the Supreme Court in M/s Srigdhaa Beverages (supra), DISCo \'ls/ Licensees have the right to collect the arrears of previous owners from the subsequent purchasers. In that vierv of the matter, the petitioner is liable to pay the dues orved by M/s- Global Drugs private Limited as on the date of sale/purchase trarsaction of subject premises, in case the dues remain unpaid even after the date of the sale/purchase trarsacLion.

7. Accordingly, the Writ petition is dismissed. No costs. Hor,vever, the respondent_authorities shall grant reasonable time for the petitioner to clear off the dues; and in case of default by the petitioner, the respondent authorities are at liberty to initiate appropriate proceedings for recovery of dues, in accordance r.vith law. No costs. Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall stand i To, 1 2 closed //TRUE COPY// I SD ALLIKARJUNA RAO STANT REGISTRAR SECTION OFFICER ! One CC to SRt S.V|VEK CHANDRA SEKHAR, Advocate. [OpUC] one cc to sRt N.SREEDHAR REDDY, (sc FOR TSTRANSCO) topucl Two CD Copies. BSK BS HIGH COURT DATED:1 1tl$tz}Zs R (. I-. i ,e o,) )- 16 sEP 206 * i,. 1IC ORDER WP.No.19982 of 2009 DISMISSING THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS l I I I i , i i , , i i l , , i