High Court · 2025

Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated h the affidavit filed therewith' the High Court may be pi"r."O to pass an order or orders or writ or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of lvlandamus declaring the action of Respondents in issuing demand notices tor payment of Cross SuOsiOv Surcharge-( C!9 llgllh: :I ?991 06 to 2014-15 vide Lr.trto.SE/OP/CC/HYD/SAOI nnO(nryJAO (HT)-D.No^lo^7,]t 2025dated31.o1.2025andLr.No.SE/oP/B.Hills/Hyd/SAo/JAo/HT/D.No.399/24 auLo ot.oz.zo25 issued by the 2nd and 3rd Respondent respectively, purported to be based on the Tarifi Order dated 30 '08 '2024 issued by the Telangana rt"itri"ity Regulatory commission determining the cSS for FY 2005-06 lo 2O14- is, ,i ,initrrly, illegal, contrary to the Judgment dated 19'122023 of this Hon'ble Co*t in W.p.(o. tigtA ot 200'6 and batch, provisions of the Electricity Act, 2003' besidesbeingviolativeofthepetitioner.Srights.guaranteedunderArticlel4, igir jigl of thJ 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 disc6nnection of power supply pursuant to the demand notices vide Lr'No' belOptCClnirilSnOlnnOlHTyJA O(H.T) D.No.707712025 dated 31 .01 .2025 and Lr.No.SE/ Op/B.Hitts/HydlSeOl.lROl HT/D.No.399/24 dated 01.02.2025 issued by the 2nd and 3rd Respondent respectively Counsel for the Petitioner: SRl. M/S INDUS LAW FIRM CounsetfortheRespondents:SRIN.SREEDHARREDDYSCFORTGSPDCL The Court made the following: ORDER 1 THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE PULLA KARTHIK ORDER: W.P.No.114O4 of 2025 With the consent of both the parties, this writ petition is taken up for disposal at the stage of admission.

2. The writ petition is hled with the following prayer: "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 demand notices for paJ,.rnent of Cross Subsidy Surcharge CSS for the trY 2005-06 to 201415 vide Lr No.Str/OP/ CC/HYD/SAO/ AAOHT/JAO H T D.No.7O77 /2025 dated 31.O1.2025 and Lt No.Str/OP/B.Hills/ Hyd/ SAO/JAO/HT/D.No.399/24 dated O 1.O2.2O25 issued by the 2"d and 3rd Respondent respectively purported to be based on the Tariff Order dated 3O.O8.2O24 issued by the Telalgana Electricity Regulatory Cornrnission determrning the CSS for FY 2005-06 to 2014-15 as arbitrary, illegal, contrary to the Judgment dated L9J2.2023 of this Court in W.P.No.14918 of 2006 alcl batch provisions of the Electricity Act, 2OO3 besides being violative of the petitioners rights guaranteed under Articie 14, 19(1)(9) of the Constitution of India and consequently set aside the same".

3. Heard the iearned counsel for the petitioner and Sri N.Sreedhar Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for TGSPDCL for l,\ respondents and perused the record.

4. Today, when the matter is taken up, it is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the issue raised in the present l l 2 writ petition is squarely covered by the order dated 10.3.2025 passed by this Court in W.P.No.7316 of 2025. The same is not seriously d.isputed by the learned counsel appearing for the respondents -

5. In view of the above, for the reasons alike in the order dated 1O.3.2O25 in W.P.No.73L6 of 2025, this writ petition is disposed of directing the respondent No.2 to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 25.2.2025 and pass appropriate orders thereon strictly in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and communicate a copy thereof to the petitioner. Till such time, the respondents are directed not to tal<e any coercive steps, including that of disconnection of power supply to the petitioner, in pursualce of the impugned demald notice 'zide Lr.No.Str/OP/B'Hills/Hyd/SAO/JAO/HT/D.No.399124 dated

1.2.2025 issued by respondent No.2. Miscellaneous applications, if any, pending in tl-ris writ petition stand closed. //TRUE COPY// SD/- P. PAoMnNeeHa ReooY R DE PIJTY REGISTRA SECTION OFFICER \ To, '+:i,"'J;l'rfl llft :3Y38?'ff PJS,$lLi{$ffJ:,i:'li?ii3:"?;"'L?i.," Khairitabad, Hyderabad, Telangana luu uzz' 2. The Superintending Engineer' TGSPDCL' Operation 6snf16l Circle Chandra ' v'iir;&;ptex. otf rtodr M.G Road' Hvderabad' € I t

3. The Superintending Engineer, TGSpDCL. Operation Circle GTS Colony, trragadda. Banjara Hills Hyderabad

4. One CC to M/S INDUS LAW F|RM Advocate tOpUCl 5. One CC to SRt N. SREEDHAR REDDY SC FoR T'GSPDCL topuc] 6. Two CD Copies KKS GJP (Along with the copy of the order dated 10.03.2025 in W.p.NO.731 6 OF 2O2S) (t- HIGH COURT DATED:1610412025 \ I ORDER WP.No.11404 o12025 ItlE STA 14: ?.\ 01 ilAY 2025 t sPAtcr E!) DISPOSING THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS z-fd \q-- -(*6 THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE PULLA KARTHIK IVRIT PETITION No.7316 of 2025 ORDER: Aggrieved by the impugned demand notice bearing Lr.No.SE/Op/ B'Hills/Hyd/sAO / JAO /HT /D.No.384 / 24 dated o1.02.2o25 issued by respondent No.2, directing the petitioner to pay an amount of Rs. I O,53,72,551/- towards Cross Subsidy Surcharge, the present Writ Petition is filed.

2. Heard Sri Y. Shreyas Reddy, learned counsel, representing M/s. Indus Law Firm, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri N. Sreedhar Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for Southern Power Distribution Company of Telangana Limited, appearing on behalf of respondent Nos.1 and 2. With their consent, the writ petition is taken up for disposal at admission stage.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the present impugned demand notice dated 01.O2.2025, issued by respondent No.2 for payment of Rs.1o,53,72,551/- towards Cross Subsidy Surcharge, is contrary to the common order of a Division Bench of this Court dated

19.12.2023 in W.P.Nos. 149 18 of 2006 and batch, wherein, the Division Bench had set aside the impugned demand notices therein, holding that 7 2 PK, J Ur. P.No.7316 of 2025 they were issued in violation of the Electricity (Removal of Diffrculties) Second Order, 2OO5. Therefore, the petitioner submitted its representation to respondent No.2 on 27.O2.2025, requesting to withdraw the inrpugned demand notice and not to take lurther action. However, no action has been taken thereon. so- far. It is further submitted that in similar circumstances, this Court vide order dated

20.O2.2O25 in W.P.No.5O98 of 2025, directed the respondents therein to consider and pass appropriate orders on the representation of the petitioner therein. Therefore, iearned counsel for the petitioner prays this Court to pass a similar order in the present writ petition also.

4. Learned Standing Counsel for respondent Nos. 1 and 2 fairly submits the rcspondent No.2 will consider the represcntation of the petitioner d,ated 21.O2.2O25 and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law.

5. Having regard to the submissions made by learned counsel for the respcctive partics, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing respondent No.2 to consider the representation of the petitioner d.ated 2I.O2.2O25 and pass appropriate orders thereon, duly providing an opportunity of hearing, strictly in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of two (02) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, and communicate a copy thereof to the petitioner. r.i 3 PK, J W.P.No.7316 oI2025 Till such time, the respondents are directed not to take any coercive steps, including that of disconnection of power supply to the petitioner, in pursuance of the impugned demand notice vide Lr.No.SE/Op/ B'Hills/Hyd/SAO I JAO /Hr /D.No.384 / 24 dated 01.02.2025 issued by respondent No.2. Miscellaleous applications, if any, pending in this writ petition, shall stand closed. No costs. Date: 10.03.2O25 GSP JUSTICE PULLA KARTHIK