High Court · 2025

Petition under Articre 226 0f the constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fired therewith, the High court may be pleased to pass an order or orders or writ or direction more particurarry one in the nature of- writ of Mandamus decraring the action of Respondents in issuing demands for payment of cross Subsidy Surcharge (css) for the Fy 2015-16 and First Quarter ot Fy 2016-17 vide Lr.No. SE/op/B'Hirs/ sAo/JAoiHTlF.Demand Notice/D'No'143124' dt.22.07.2024, Lr.No. SE/Op/B,Hirs/sAO/JAO/ HT/F.Demand Notice/D'No'31 4, dt.07.12.2024, issued by the 2nd Respondent, purported to be based on the Tariff order d1.1g.04.2024 issued by the Terangana Erectricity Regulatory commission determining the csS for Fy 20.r5-16, as arbitrary, i*egar, contrary to the Judgment dt-19.12.2o23 of this Hon'bre court in w.p.No.14918 of 2006 and batch, provisions of the Erectricity Act, 2003, besides being viorative of the petitioner's rights guaranteed under Articre r 4, r 9(1 xg) of the constitution of lndia and consequenfly set aside the same. lA NO: 1 OF 2025 PetitionunderS}ectionl5lcPCprayingthatinthecircumstancesstatedin the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the Respondents not to take any coercive steps including that of disconnection of power supply pursuant to the demand notice vide Lr.No. SE/oP/B,Hills/SAo/JAoiHT/ F. Demand Notice/D.No.1431 24, dl. 22.07.2024, Lr.No. SE/OP/BHi|Is/sAo/JAO/HT/F. Demand Notice/D.No. 314, dt. 07.12.2024. issued by the 2nd resp,rndent. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI DEEPAK CHOWDARY Counsel for the Respondents: SRI N. SREEDHAR REDDY, Sc FoR TGSPDCL The Court made the following: ORDER HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE SUREPALLI NANDA WRIT PETITION No.571O of 2O25 ORDER: Heard Sri Deepak Chowdary, learned counse! appearing on behalf of petitioner and Sri N. Sreedhar Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for TGSPDCL, appearing \5 on behalf of respondent Nos. 1 and 2.

2. The petitaoner approached the Court seeking prayer as under: v "...to pass an order or orders or writ or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of Respondents in issuing demands for payment of Cross Subsidy Surcharge C'CSS") for the FY 2015-16 & First Quarter of FY 2016-17 vide Lr.No. SE/OP/B'HiIIs/SAO/JAO/HTlF. Demand Notice/D.No. 143/24, dt. 22.O7.2024, Lr.No. SE/OP/B'Hitls/SAO/JAO/ HT/F. Demand Notice/D.No. 374, dt. 07.72.2024, issued by the 2nd Respondent, purported to be based on the Tariff Order dt. 19.O4.2024 issued by the Telangana Electricity Regulatory Commission determining the CSS for FY 2015- 16, as arbitrary, illegal, contrary to the Judgment dt. 19.12.2023 of this Honble Court in W.P. No. 14918 of 2006 and batch, provisions of the Electricity Act, 2003, besides being violative of the petitioners' rights guaranteed under Article 14, 19 (1) (g) of the Constitution of India and consequently set aside the same and pass...". 2 SN, J \\P 5710 2025 3, The case of the petitioner, in brief, is that the petitioner company is al'ailing HT power to its hotel namely ITC Kakatiya, at Begumpet, Hyderabad and entered into an Agreement with 1't respondent with a Contracted Maximum Demand of 1200 KVA and later reduced to 900 KVA vide HT Service Connection No. BIH-588. The petitioner company was purchasing power from the generator M/s. Ind-Barath Energies Limited. However, the petitioner's qenerator was granted permission by State Government of Andhra Pradesh under Section 43 (1) of the Electricity Supply Act, 1948 and is squarely covered under the Electricity (Removal of DifFiculties) Second Order, 2005. Therefore, thr: petitioner is entitled to exemption from the payment of Cross Subsidy Surcharge (CSS). Following the issuance of the Common Order by the learned TGERC, the 2nd respondent issued a demand notice vide Lr. No. SE/OPIB'Hills/SAO/JAO/HT/F. Demand Notice/D'No. r43/ 24, dated 07.12.2024. The demand notice sought payment of Rs.3,15,30,639/- (Rupees Three Crore fifteen lakh Thirty Thousand Six Hundred and Thirty Nine only) as CSS for the year FY 2015-16 tc, FY 2016-17 with a clear stipulation that failing to do so would result in the surcharges being raised as per existing -) SN. ,, wP 57 t0 2025 rules without further notice and service would be disconnected. It is further the case of the petitioner that the impugned demand raised by the respondents is a clear violation of Electricity (Removal of Difficulties) Second Order, 2005 and a direct contravention of the orders passed by this Court in W.p. No. 14918 of 2006 and batch and hence liable to be set aside. Therefore, the petitioner approached the Court by filing the present writ petition.

4. It is the specific case of the petitioner that in pursuance to the impugned notice vlde Lr.No. SE/OplB,Hills /SAO/JAO/HT/ E.Demand Notice/D.No.143/24, dated 22.07.2024 and demand notice ylde Lr.No. SE/OP/B'HII|;/SAO/JAO/HT/F. Demand Notice/ D.No.314, dated 07.12.2024 issued by the 2nd respondent the petitioner had submitted a detailed representation dated

17.02.2025 addressed to the 2,d respondent herein requesting the 2nd respondent to withdraw the said demand notices explaining the reasons in detail specifically contending that the said demand notice is contrary to the Judgment of the Apex Court dated 10.09.2024 passed in SLp.No.25649 of 2024 and the order dated 19.12.2023 passed in W.p. No. 14918 of 2006 and batch. It is further case of the petitioner that the 2nd -\ 4 SN, J wP 5710 2025 respondent Without considering the detailed explanati,ln dated

17.02.2023 submitted to the 2nd respondent h€:rein in pursuant to the demand notices dated 22.07.2024 and 0',?.t2.202t4 issued to the petitioner by the 2nd respondent herein is proceeding for initiating coercive steps against the petitioner including disconnection of power supply to the petitioner's hotel, ITC Kakatiya, at Begumpet. Aggrieved by the said action of the respondents, the present writ petition is filed.

5. The learned counsel appearing on behalf cf the petitioner submits that the writ petition could be disposed of directing the 2nd respondent herein to consider the grievance of the petitioner as put forth in the petitioner's representation dated 17.02.2025 seeking withclrawal of the impugned demand notices dated

22.07.2024 and 07.12.2024 issued to.the petitioner by' the 2nd respondent herein within a reasonable period.

6. The learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of respondents does not dispute the said submlssion made by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner.

7. Takino into consideratio n: (a) The facts and circumstances of the case, 5 SN, J wP 5710 2025 (b) The submissions made by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of respondents, (c) The contents of the petitioner's detailed representation dated 17.0.2.2025 addressed to the 2nd respondent herein seeking withdrawal of the demand notices dated 22.07.2024 and 07.12.2024 issued to the petitioner by the 2nd respondent herein explaining the reasons for the same, (d) The fact that the said representataon of the petitioner dated 17.02.2O25 had not been considered by the 2nd respondent as on date, The writ petition is disposed of directing the 2nd respondent to consider the grievance of the petitioner as put fofth in the petitioner's representataon dated L7.O2.2O25 addressed to the znd respondent herein seeking withdrawal of the demand notices 22.07.2024 and 07.12.2O24 issued to the petitioner by the 2nd respondent herein, in accordance to law, in conformity I ( with principles of natural justice by giving an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner and pass appropriate ) 6 SN, J wP 5710 2025 orders within a period of two (2) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Till the above exercise is initiated and concluded by passing of appropriate orders by the 2nd respondent duly considering the detailed representation dated L7.OZ.2O2S as per the directions as indicated above, within the time period as stipulated as above, the respondents are directed not to take any coercive steps including that of disconnection of power supply pursuant to the demand notices 22.OT.2024 and 07.L2.2O24 issued to the petitioner by the 2"d respondent herein. There shail be no order as to costs. As a sequel, the miscellaneous petitions, if any pending, in the Writ petition shall also stand closed. SD/-L.VIJAYA LAKSHMI 4FPFTANT RE GISTRAR To, //TRUE COPYII

1. The Chairm Distribution Hyderabad. [ !i="r,o* an;and Ma.naging Director, Telangana State Southern power company Limited, Mint Compourid, S#;i; *ri ii;; ; 2 Superintendino Enoineer, operation circre, Banjara Hirrs. TGSpDCL. GTS ^ Cotony, ErrasirjdalHyddr"-fr;. i;i;il;: "'' i,ElEEEis,qi^?"."I"3[f*"#st:#,,s:1,36?B3tio,,"r 5. Two CD Cooies OFFICER T J /BSK a I \, .{ i.' L.'.j .Y .r!r' HIGH COURT DATE D :0 310312025 ORDER WP.No.5710 of 2025 !aI I I CC TODAY 1$t sTAr€ o 1l \qp$ 825 _o? ,i t r,,i DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS