The High Court · 2025

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circur stances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, the High Court r ray be pleased to direct the Respondents 2 to 7 not to disconnect the power sup I y bearing Sc. No. MDK 2559, lA NO: 3 OF 2025 Between:

1. Southern Power Distribution Company ., of Telangan;r Ltd, Rep. by its Chairman and lvlanaging Director, Mint Compound, Hyderitl ad.

2. Southern Power Distribution Company , of Telangana -td Rep., by The Superintending Engineer, Operation Medak Circle, Medak t iskict.

3. Southern Power Distribution Company of Telangana Ltd Il :p by its Divisional Engineer, operation, l/edak Circle, Medak District.

4. Southern Power Distribution Company of Telangana Ltd, E ep by its Assistant Divisional Engineer, operation, lvledak Circle, Medak Distric .

5. Southern Power Distribution Company of Telangana Ltd, ll >p by its Divisional Engineer, Detection of Pilferage of Energy (DPE), Met ak Circle, Medak District. ...PI:'ITIONERYR-2TO6 AND 1 2 fvl/s. Ansh lspat LLP (MDK 2559), Sy. No. 165/4, Kamar tm Village Chinna Shankarampet rural mandal Chegunta, Medak District R I ) by its partner Sri Satish Kumar Agarwal. =NT/PETITIONER The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, )ower and Energy Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad-500022. ... RESPON ]

3. Chief Vigilance officer, Vigilance and APTS Team APTS Police Station' Medak District ...*ESOO"=NTS/ RESPONDENTS 1 &7 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 dated 4.7 '2025 passed in l A No' 1 of 2025 in W P No 19200 of 2025, inthe interests of iustice and pass such other or further orders' Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI R'VINOD REDDY Counsel forthe Respondent No'1 : GP FOR ENERGY Counsel for Respondents No'2to6 : SRI N'SREEDHAR. REDDY' SC FOR TSSPDCL Counsel for ResPondents No'7 : W.P.No .1920 oF 2025 3 Between: j.,!.*"[y,Tn"?u,??]i';o]",J,?3{t.L1ET1['Yll3%"""?:isfi Uh"A?:LrEif, Satish Kumar Agarwal. ...PETITIONER AND 1 The State of Telangana' ReP' Department, Secretariat, HYde by its Principal Secretary, Power and Energy ra6ad-5OOO22 Rep bv its ' 3fl:lli'* i"%-fi:,1?L:ll3B'i:"1,"?:ili"?u"*f';,"s1 '3ft *ii[]J.?#"1^?ii:L?:3J"3.,"S',fi :'.#h":-ll,"J3:P'J,3i''5"''bvrhe 4 Southern Power Distribution Company Ltd of Telangana' Rep by its Divisional " ffiillEe;,6eiution-'-tr,t"oat circld' M')dak District bv its Assistant ' 3',,',1i,,?i!,??t:,1?i:':'3:.':1ffi"^lBzi,'"::t 3:il""'3l*n?il3t.Tfo 'I,132,',,1lli' 'P:UIX8:?'3:/3rc?ii"'3i''3,?;:;Y'Ji'llt'9,'?BEPi:'il'5'"&'6I':3"ffi District 7. Chief Meda Vigilance officer, Vigilance and APTS Team APTS Police Station' k District. t"J:1 ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia t raying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the F i rh Court may be pleased to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly cr e in the nature of Writ of [vlandamus declaring the action of the Respondents 2 o 7 in issuing the impugned demand notice bearing Lr. No. ADE/ OP/MDK t. No./ D. No. 539 12025 daled 27.06.2025 as illegal, arbitrary, unjust and agarrs the provisions of the Electricity Act, 2003 and set aside the same. IA NO: 2 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the ci 1 umstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, the High Cc L rt may be pleased to stay the operation of the demand notice bearing Lr. Jo. ADE/OP/lr/DK F. No./D.No.53912025 dated 27.OG.2025 including the demanr or payment of the compounding fee by the 7th Respondent in the interest of Justr ;e. lA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the cir :um51sn.". .,r,"0 in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, the High Cor rt may be pleased to direct the Respondents 2 to 7 not to disconnect the power ;upply bearing Sc. No. tvlDK 2559 lA NO: 3 OF 2025 Between: '1 . Southern Power Distribulion Company of Telanganrr Ltd, Rep. by its Chairman and Managing Director, Mtnt Compound, Hyde-i bad.

2. Southern Power Distribution Company of Telanganz Ltd, Rep., by its Superintending Engineer, Operation Medak Circle, Medall )istrict.

3. Southern Power Distribution Company of Telangan; Ltd, Rep by its Divisional Engineer, operation, Medak Circle, Medak Dist-i ;t.

4. Southern Power Distribution Company of Telangana Ltd (ep by its Assistant Divisional Engineer, operation, Medak Circle, Medak Dist-i I.

5. Southern Power Distribution Comoany of Telanqana Ltd. I leo bv its Divisional - Energy (bPE), tV ( :dk e ircle, Medak Engineer, Detection of Pilferagd of District. ...PETITIONERS/ RES I INDENTS No.2to6 AND 1 . M/s. Ansh lspat LLP, (MDK 2559) Sy. No. 165/4, Kamaram Village Chinna Shankarampi:t rural m)ndal Cheglnta, Medak District Rep by its partner Sri Satish Kumar Agarwal.

6. The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Power and Energy Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad.

7. Chief Vigilance officer, Vigilance and APTS Team APTS Police Station, lvledak District. ... RESPONDENT/PETITIONER ...RESPONDENTS/ RESPONDENTS 1&7 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavrt filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased pleased to vacate the order dated 4.7 .2025 passed in l.A No. 1 of 2025 in W P No. 19203 of 2025, in the interests of .iustice and pass such other or further orders. Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI R.VINOD REDDY Counsel forthe Respondent No.1 : GP FOR ENERGY cou n se I f or Respo nde nts No.2to6' t# fatfF5.tl#.*. oo"' Counsel for ResPondents No.7 : W,P.No.19217 OF 2025 Between: I\,l/s. Ansh lsoat LLP (tvlDK 2559), Sy. No. 165/4, Kamaram Village Chinna Shankarampei rural mandal Chegunta, Medak District 502248 Rep by its partner Srr Satish Kumar Agarwal. ...PETITIONER AND 1 2 3 4 The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary' Power and Energy Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad-500022. Southern Power Distribution Company Ltd, of Telangana, Rep. by its Chairman and lrilanaging Director, lrrlint Compound, Hyderabad. Southern Power Distribution Company Ltd., of Telangana, Rep., by The Superintending Engineer, Operation lvledak Circle, lvledak District' Southern Power Distribution Company Ltd of Telangana, Rep by its Divisional Engineer, operation, lr/edak Circle, lrr'ledak District ./

5. Southern Power Distribution Company Ltd of Telanganz, Rep by its Assistant Divisional Engineer, operation, Medak Circle, Medak Dis:r ct.

6. Southern Power Distribution Company Ltd of Telangana 1ep by its Divisional Engineer, Detection of Pilferage of Energy (DPE), i4 rdak Circle, Medak District.

7. Chief Vigilance officer, Vigilance and APTS Team rVTS Police Station, Medak District. ...RESPONDENTS Pelition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndit praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the lligh Court may be pleased to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly rne in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondents tto 7 in issuing the impugned demand notice bearing Lr. No. ADE/ OP/wDK : No./ D. No. 544 12025 daled 27.06.2025 as illegal, arbitrary, unjust and agai st the provisions of the Electricity Act, 2003 and set aside the same. lA NO: 2 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the c rcumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, the High O rurt may be pleased to stay the operation of the demand notice bearing L. No. ADE/OP/MDK F. No./D.No.54412025 daled 27.06.2025 including the dema I I for payment of the compounding fee by the 7th Respondent in the interest of Jur tice. lA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the ( rcumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, the High {l )urt may be pleased to direct the Respondents 2 to 7 not to disconnect the powe - supply bearing Sc. No. MDK 2559 lA NO: 3 OF 2025 Between:

1. Southern Power Distribution Company of Telangana Llc Rep. by its Chairman and Managing Director, Mint Compouid, Hy< r rabdd. ' 2. Southern Power Distribution Comoanv of Telanoana Ltc ReD.. bv The Superintendi ng Engineer, Operation il/edak CirJe, Irile, i rk Disirici. (-- 'r \ 3, Southern Power Diskibution ompany of Telangana Ltd, Rep by its Divisional Engineer, operation, Medak Circle, Madak Distri-ct.

4. Southern Power Distribution Company of Telangana Ltd, Rep by its Assistant Divisional Engineer, operation, M6da( Circle, M-edak Oisirict.

5. Southern Power Distribution Company of Telangana Ltd, Rep by its Divisionat lngineer, Detection of Pitferage oi Eniergy (DPE), tr4edak Ciicle, tr,,tedak District, AND 1 M/s. Ansh lspat LLP (MDK 2_559), Sy. No_ 165/4, Kamaram Vi age Chinna Shankarampet- rural mandal Chegunta, tvledak District Rep by its [artner Sri Satish Kumar Aganaral. ...PETITIONER/ RESPONDENTS No.2to6 ... RESPONDENT/PETITIONER

2. The State of Telangana, Department, Secretariat, . by its.Principal Secretary, Power and Energy erabad 3. Chief Vigilance officer, Vigilance and APTS Team ApTS police Station, Rep Hvd lvledak District. ...RESPONDENTS/ RESPONDENTS Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Cou( may be pleased to vacate the order dated 04.7.2025 passed in l.A No. 1 of 2O2S in W p No. 19217ot 2025, in the interests of justice and pass such other or further orders. Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI R.VINOD REDDY Counsel forthe Respondent No.1 : GP FOR ENERGY counsel for Respondents No.2to6 , lt l6[r.aa3r*r*=oot, Counsel for Respondents No.7 : The Court made the following: COMMON ORDER 1 ! f i I ! : I i t I I I i I t r IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELAN( IANA AT HYDERABAD HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NAGESH BHEEMAPT\ {A lIIRIT PETITIONS No. 192OO 19203 AND 192t7 Ci t 2025 30-12.2025 Between: M/s Ansh lspat LI-P (MDK 2559), Rep. by its Partne:r Sri Satish Kumar Agarwal Ancl The Statc: of Telangar-ra Rep. by its Prinr:iPal Secretar!, Pos,er & Energv l)epartmcnt &, six others Petitioncr l?:spondents COMMON ORDER: 'l'hi: abrrvc three Writ Petitions are hlecl c.restioning the demand noiices isstred b5, the Sth Responc:nt clated

27.06.20'25 in lhree dil'l'erenL proceedings 'tiz. ADE /OP/MDK/F.No /D No.S3tl/2O2s, ADEIOP/MDK/F No./D No 539 l2O2a and ADE/OP/MDK/ F.No./D.No 544 12025 respcctivcll'. As all the three Writ Petitions art ( ommon ilt nature, all o[ thcm are takcn up together and are b: rrg decided by a Corrrmon C) rcler- *.--- 2

2. The case of petitioner is that they are the consumer of the 2nd respondent company, having obtained power supply under High Tcnsion Category-lll(A) Industrial with a Contracted Maximum Demand (CMD) of 4999 KVA u'ith service connection bearing SC.No. MDK 2559 and the power supply is being utilised for manufacturing Billets from metal scrap and spongc iron. It is stated, the 6th Respondent allegedly inspected petitioner industry on 16.06.2O25 and noticed that water from an agricultural bore-well of an agriculturist by name Sri Reddy Raju is being utilised by petitioner industry for cooling purposes and other industrial activiry. Thereafter, petitioner received notice dated 27.06.2025 which was served on O3.O7 .2025 under Section 135 of thc Electricity Act, 2OO3 (for short, 'the ActJ for committing theft of enerry. Pursuant thereto, impugned demand notices dated

27.06.2025 have been issued to petitioner, provisionally assessing the loss caused to Rcspondents, due to theft of electricity committcd by them.

2.1. Petitioner challenges issuance of notices dated

27.6.2025 as illegat and without jurisdiction and submits that as no theft of electricity has been committed, the impugned noti66J'are liable to be set aside. Their case is that the I J authorised olhcer q,ho conducted inspection, has t< sene the report at thc <:nci of the inspcction as per Clause 10.1.3 of' Cieneral Telms and Condilions ol the Supply (l TCS), but however, respoudcnts have not served the calcu z tion sheet along with thc dcmand notice as stipulated in Claus.- 70.2.4 ol GTCS, hence, the demand notices are bad in law.

3. Pcnciing Writ Petitions, by order datect [ +.O7 .2O2c, this Court granted interim dircction as prayed fbr sutlect to petitioner depositing 5006 of the demanded amolrrr , pursuant to the provisional assessment notice dated 27 .06.2 125 issued by tl-re 5tt, respondcnt which shall be subject to out omc of the Writ Petitions.

4. Respondents 2 to 6 filed counter s ,{rting that petitioner is a f lT Consumer of Respondents ltl' ' C:rt.I) lor industrial pur-poscs with a CMD of 4999 KVA bert ing Service Connection No. Mt)K 2559. On inspection mad: by the 6d, Re spondent orr 16.06.2025, petitioner was [,r,r rd itlegal)y drawing u,ater I'rom thc agricultural bore-rvell of 5 IP motor of Sri Reddy Suman by illegally and directly tappir I electricity lrom LT linr: frrr industrial purpose, hence, tht.r indulged in theft of energ)-. As per inspection report, a case \{€ s booked by the 6th respondent under FIR No. I 1O8 of 2025 rt irler Section 4 135 of the 2003 Act. It is also stated, pending dctermination of the civil iiability by the appropriate Court under Section 154(5) of the Act, eleclricity charges due to the company have been provisionally assessed under the impugned notices and the same were served on the representative of Petitioner on

04.O7.2025 enclosing calculation sheet and assessment period for the same for reference.

4.7. It is further slatcd that loss of encrgy caused to the Respondents in view of illegal activities of petitioner by way of theft and pitterage of enerry has been provisionaliy assessed, based on the Assessment Rules contained in Appcndix XII and Clause 1O of General Terms & Conditions of Supply. It is further contended thaL there is no illegality or irregularity in issuing the said notices and contends that u'hether the petitioner committed theft of electricity or not, is a question of fact which can only be decided by the competent- Court of criminal jurisdiction in thc case rcgistered against them under Section 135 of the Act, after trial. It is stated that impugned notices dated 27.06.2025 have provisionally assessed the civil Iiability of petitioner. It is further stated that at the stage of admission of Writ Petitions, this Court granted interim directions staying the operation of the impugned notices on the ) condition of petitioner depositing SOyo of thc :rovisional asscssment amount and sincc pctitioner paid 5O,Z tf the saicl .tm()llnt, thr-. finaI deterrnination ol civil liability r,r,o r1d only bc dor.rc by Specizrl Court, u1;on reference by Respon,l )nts to the Spccial Court under Section t 54 (S) of the 2O0l Act. It is further statecl that in vieu, of payment of SOoh of thr: crovisional assessment :tmour)t, Respondents r.r,ill refer the s sue to the Special Court constituted under Section 153 of t re Act, for determination of civil liability for thc thcft cf electricitv committed bv petirioner and praycd to dismis: the Writ Petitions as petitioncr has not made out ar., case lbr in Lerference by this Court.

5. Heard learned counsel for petitioner lj iR Vinod Redcly and Sri N. Sreedhar Reddy, learned Standi rg Counsel for Respondents 2 to 6.

6. Oonsidered the rival submissions Though pctitioner states that they have not committed ar i. offence of theft of eiectrir:ity, therefore. the impugned rro ir:es datt:d 27.06.2025 zrre liable to be set aside, it is to t,r seen, the impugncd notices catcgorically state that inslt t;tron was conducted b._v ths Su, respondent who noticed th r petitioner indulged in theft of enerry by tapping electricitSz fir rn the over t 6 he ad wires. Whether petitioner corrrmitted theft of e lcctriciEy or not is a matter to be decided by the competent criminal Court in the case already booked against petitioner under Section 135 of the 2OO3 Act in the trial to be conducted by it Even determination of civil liability can onlv be done by the Special Court under Section 154 (5) of thc said Act As pelitione r has already paid 5O% of the, amounl demanded through impugned notices, this Court dce ms it' appropria te to dircct Rcspondents (TGSPDCL) to refer the issue for dc [crm inat-ion of civil liability of petitioner, to the Special Court, under Section 154 (5) of the Act. In view of the above conclusion arrived' this Court 7. is of the opinion that judgmcnts o[ l.he Hon'trle Supreme Court in Executiue Engineer, Southern Electricitg Supplg Compang of Orissa Limited (SOUTHCO) a' Sri Seetarom Rice MitU and West Bengal Sto:te Electricitg Disttibution Conltang Limited u- Orion Metal Priaate Limited2 ' relied on by learned counsel for petitioner are of no help to the case on hand. The Writ Petitions are zrccordingly' disposed of 8, directing Respondent - TGSPDCL to refer the issue fo' I (2012) 2 scc l08 '(2020) l8 scc 588 7 dctermination of civil liability of peLitioner to the Spec :rl Court. und;r Section 154 (S) of thc Act. No costs. 9 Pcnding miscellaneous Applications, il anv, shall s tan cl closed S ] '- L. VIJAYA LAXMI ASS 1 TANT REGISTRAR To, //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER '1 . The Principal Secretary, Power and Energy Departmenl lecretariat' Telangana State, Hyderabad-500022.

2. The Chairman and Managing Director, Southern Power t istribulion Company Ltd., of Telangana, Mint Compound, Hyderabad.

3. The The Superintending Engineer, Operation Med-ak Ci r ie, Southern Power Distribution bompany L-td., of Telangana, Medak Distric. 4 The Divisional Enqineer, operation, Southern Power Di:'l ibution Company Ltd o[ Telangana, Medak Circlb, Medak District.

5. The Assistant Divisional Engineer, operation' Medak ci1 le' Southern Power Distribution Company Ltd of Telangana, tvledak Distri(.t

6. The Divisional Engineer, Detection of Pilferage of Ener'; (DPE),.Medak Circle, Southern Piower Distribution Compan, Ltd of Te i ngana, Medak District.

7. The Chief Vigilance officer, Vigilance and APTS Team r rTS Police Station, Medak District.

8. One CC to SRI R.VINOD REDDY, Advocate. [OPUC] 9. Two CCs to GP FOR ENERGY, High Court for the Sta.r of Telangana [OUT] 10 One CC to SRI N.SREEDHAR REDDY, SC FOR TGS r ICL [OPUC] 1 1 . Two CD Copies. BSK HIGH COURT DATED:3011212025 -t ES I i4 ( o \)' o() t9. t l,' l':,7 2n25 s r qTC * COMMON ORDER WP.No.19200, 19203 &19217 ot2025 DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITIONS WITHOUT COSTS {\ R9 u &\ , l'/ u