Telangana High Court
Andhra Pradesh Association Of The Deaf vs State Of Telangana on 1 April, 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA
AT HYDERABAD
THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI APARESH KUMAR SINGH
AND
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE G.M.MOHIUDDIN
WRIT APPEAL No.371 of 2026
DATED: 01.04.2026
Between:
Andhra Pradesh Association of the Deaf,
Rep., by Venkat Reddy,
Hayath Nagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District.
... Appellant
AND
State of Telangana, rep., by its Principal Secretary, (Energy),
Hyderabad, TS and 3 others.
... Respondents
JUDGMENT:
Heard Sri Prabhakar Sripada, learned counsel represents Mr. Durga Prasad Kotamraju, learned counsel for the appellant, Sri N. Sreedhar Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for Telangana Southern Power Distribution Company Limited appears for respondent Nos.2 and 3 and Sri J. Prabhakar, learned Senior Counsel represents Sri Gokul Rama Rao, learned counsel for respondent No.4.
2. Name of respondent No.4 was mutated by the respondent Electricity Company by impugned order dated 05.01.2017 in place of name of the appellant, which aggrieved it to approach the learned writ Court. The writ 2 petition was dismissed with liberty to the appellant to raise the issues before the competent Court of civil jurisdiction. The learned writ Court also took into note that as per the averments in the writ petition, the appellant is the only surviving member of the Managing Committee of the Association and doubted the resolution produced by him to rectify the name of the appellant Association in the records. Being aggrieved, the appellant has preferred this appeal.
3. On being specifically asked, learned Standing Counsel for the respondent Electricity Company has categorically submitted that the Consumer Grievance Redressal Forum (CGRF) has been constituted under the Electricity Act, 2003 to deal with such disputes.
4. The dispute raised by the appellant requires determination on issues of fact also. Learned writ Court, however, relegated the appellant to approach the competent Court of civil jurisdiction. In the process, it has also made certain observations. We are of the view that if the Electricity Act, 2003 provides for a statutory forum to raise the grievance in relation to transfer of the electricity connection in the name of another party, the right course for the appellant was to approach the concerned CGRF in respect of the said dispute. Therefore, the impugned direction giving liberty to the appellant to raise these issues before the competent Court of civil jurisdiction is set aside. Since the appellant is granted liberty to approach CGRF taking all grounds on law and fact available to it, any observations touching the merits of the case of the parties in the impugned 3 judgment would not influence the forum in taking an independent decision in accordance with law. If the complaint is filed by the appellant before the CGRF, the learned forum would endeavour to decide it expeditiously after due notice to the concerned party in accordance with law. Needless to say respondent No.4 would also be entitled to take all such objections against the claim made by the appellant.
4. The instant appeal is disposed of in the aforesaid manner. There shall be no order as to costs.
Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall stand closed.
______________________________________ APARESH KUMAR SINGH, CJ ______________________________________ G.M.MOHIUDDIN, J Date: 01.04.2026 ES