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 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 ("CSS") for the FY 2005-06 to 2014 15 vide Lr.No.SE/OP/B'Hi||s/Hyd/SAO/JAO/HT/ DNo.396/24 dt.O1 .02.2025, issued by the 2nd Respondent, purported to be based on the Tariff Order dated 3O.O8.2O24 issued by the Telangana Electricity Regulatory Corn Commission determining the CSS for FY 2005-06 to 2014-15, as arbitrary, illegal contrary to the Judgment dated 19.12.2O23 of this Hon'ble Court in W.P.No.14918 0 2006 and batch, p.roriisions of the Electribity Act, 2003, besides being violative of the petitione/s rights guaranteed under Article 14, 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of lndia and consequently set aside the same. lA NO: 1 OF 2025 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 direct the Respondents not to take any coercive steps including that of disconnection of the demand notice vide power supply pursuant to Lr.No.SE/OPiB'Hills/Hyd/SAO/JAO/HT/DNo.396/24 dated 01 .02.2025 issued by the 2nd o Respondent. Counsel for the Petitioner: M/S INDUS LAW FIRM Counsel for the Respondents: SRI N. SREEDHAR REDDY, SC The Court made the following: ORDER 7^ HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUREPALLI NANDA WRIT PETITION o.5834 0F 2025 ORDE R: Heard Sri N.V. Sumanth, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Sri N. Sreedhar Reddy, learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of respondent Nos.1 and 2.

2. The petitioner approached the Court seeking prayer as under: " ...to issue 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 (CSS) for the FY 2005-06 to 2014-15 Lr. No.SE/OPlB'Hills/Hyd/S AO/lAO/Hr/ D.No.396/24 dt.01.02.2025, issued by the 2nd Respondent purported to be based on the Tariff Order dated 30.08.2024 issued by the Telangana Electricity Regulatory Commission determining the CSS for FY 2OO5-06 to 2014-15 as arbitrary, illegal, contrary to the Judgment dated 19-12-2023 of this Hon'ble Court in W.P. No. 14918 of 2006 and batch, provisions of the Electricity Act, 2003 besides being violative of the petitioner's rights guaranteed under ) wP 5834 2025 Articles 14, 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of and consequently set aside the same pass... ". India

3. The case oF the petitioner, in brief, is that the petitioner is providing hospitality services in Hyderabad and has obtained High Tension power supply connection from the Telangana Electricity Regulatory Commission. The petitioner company had entered into an HT agreement with a contracted maximum demand of U5 KVA/HP and it is having power through,open access to its unit with service connection bearing No. HTSC No. BJH 736 under the name of M/s. Minerva Coffee Shop Private Limited. It is further the case of the petitioner that subsequent to the passing of the impugned order by the TGERC, the 2"d respondent had raised a demand notice dated

01.02.2025 demanding to pay an amount of Rs.27,70,68L/_ and the petitioner is entitled to the benefit of the Electricity (Removal of Difficulties) Second order, 2005 and no CSS can be levied on it for Fy 2005-06 to 2014-15. Hence, the petitioner approached the Court by filing the present writ petition. 7 3 wP 5834 2025 SN, J

4. It is submitted by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner's representation dated 22.02.2025 had been acknowledged by the office of the 2nd respondent herein on 22.02.2025 itself but no action is initiated on the said representation of the petitioner dated

22.02.2025 as on date.

5. Sri N. Sreedhar Reddy, learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of respondent Nos.1 and 2 submits that the writ petition could be disposed of directing the' 2nd respondent to consider the grievance of the petitioner as put forth by the petitioner vide representation dated 22.02.2025 made in pursuance to the demand notice dated 01.02.2025 issued to the petitioner by the 2nd respondent herein, in accordance to law within a reasonable period.

6. Takinq into consideration : (a) The aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, (b) The submissions made by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and 4 wP 5834 2025 ( learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of respondent Nos.1 and 2, (c) The fact as borne on record that no orders had been passed on petitioner,s representation dated 22.02.2025 issued to the 2nd respondent herein in pursuance to the impugned letter dated 01.02.2025 issued to the petitioner herein by the 2nd respondent, The writ petition is disposed of directing the 2nd respondent to consider the grievance of the petitioner as put forth vide petitioner,s detaited representation dated 22.O2.2025 addressed to the 2nd respondent herein in pursuance to the impugned demand notice dated 01.O2.2025 issued to the petitioner herein by the 2nd respondent, in accordance to taw, in conformity with principles of natural justice by giving reasonable opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner, within a period of three (3) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Till the above exercise is initiated by the 2nd respondent herein and concluded by passing of appropriate orders by the 2nd respondent duty 7 \ To, TJ BS 5 wP 5Ei4 2025 considering the grievance of the Petationer as Put forth by the petitioner vide petitioners representation dated 22.O2.2025 as per the directions as indicated as above within the time period as stipulated as above, the respondents are directed not to initiate any coercive steps with respect to the impugned demand notice dated 01.02.2025 issued to the petitioner by the 2nd respondent. However, there shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, the miscellaneous petitions, any, pending in the Writ Petition shall also stand closed. //TRUE COPY// SO/.MOHO,ISMAIL ANT REGISTRAR AS ECTION OFFICER bv its Chairman and Manaqinq Director' 1 . Southem Distribution Company of Telangana Limited' TSSPDCL^Corporate ' oi'i;;, ffiiiii setietarlat khairatabad, Flvderabad, Telansana 500 022 Rep 2. i'd S;G;ntenolng EnginderJrcspoct-, operation Circle Banjara Hills' 3. o;; CC to M/s lndus Law Firm' Advocate [oPUC] +. One CC to Sri N. Sreedhar Reddy, SC[OPUC] 5. Two CD CoPies Hvderabad. $ HIGH COURT CC TODAY DATE D :27 10212025 ORDER WP.No.5834 ot 2025 STATE oA 'E I ,.) 1$ ths lffi o * t DE ...t,1 .' ;-i'/ DTSPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS eJ'?" W