Telangana High Court
M/S. Sai Prakash Sudarshanam ... vs Telangana State Southern Power ... on 20 February, 2025
Author: Surepalli Nanda
Bench: Surepalli Nanda
HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE SUREPALLI NANDA
WRIT PETITION No.5121 OF 2025
ORDER:
Heard Sri Adinarayana, learned Senior Designated
Counsel representing Sri Deepak Chowdary, learned
counsel, appearing for the petitioner and Sri N.
Sreedhar Reddy, learned Standing Counsels for
TSSPDCL appearing on behalf of the respondent Nos.1
and 2.
2. The petitioner approached this Court 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 demands for payment of Cross Subsidy
Surcharge (CSS) for the FY 2005-06 to 2014-15
vide Lr.No.SE/OP/CC/HYD/SAO/AAO(HT)/JAO
(H.T)/D.No. 7077/2025, dated 31/01/2025 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 2005-06 to 2014-15 as
arbitrary, illegal, contrary to the Judgment dated
SN, J
2 WP_5121_2025
19/12/2023 of this Honourable 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 Articles
14, 19 (1) (g) of the Constitution of India and
consequently set aside the same and pass...".
3. The case of the petitioner, in brief, is that the petitioner
company is engaged in the business of manufacture and sale
of cement. The petitioner had entered into a High Tension
(HT) Agreement with the 1st respondent for power supply
with a contracted Maximum Demand (CMD) of 280 KVA AT
11 KV vide HT Service Connection No.HCD-440. The
petitioner company was purchasing power from the generator
M/s. Sudha Agro Oil and Chemical Industries Ltd., for an
uninterrupted power supply. However, the petitioner's
generator 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, the
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
SN, J
3 WP_5121_2025
issued a demand notice vide Lr.No. SE/OP/CC/HYD/ SAO/
AAO(HT)JAO(H.T)/D.No.7077/ 2025, dated 31.01.2025. The
demand notice sought payment of Rs.63,55,472/- (Rupees
Sixty Three Lakhs fifty Five Thousand Four Hundred and
Seventy Two only) as CSS for the year FY 2005-06 to FY
2014-15 with a clear stipulation that failing to do so would
result in the surcharges being raised as per existing 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, after representing to the 2nd
respondent on 13.02.2025.
4. The learned Senior Designated Counsel appearing on
behalf of the petitioner submits that the impugned demand
notice vide Lr.No. SE/OP/CC/HYD/SAO/AAO(HT)JAO
(H.T)/D.No.7077/ 2025, dated 31.01.2025 issued by the 2nd
respondent is contrary to the order of Division Bench of this
SN, J
4 WP_5121_2025
Court dated 19.12.2023 passed in W.P. No. 14918 of
2006 and batch and W.P. No. 8252 of 2008 and also the
order of the Apex Court dated 10.09.2024 passed in Central
Power Distribution Co. of A.P. Ltd., (Now Southern
Power Distribution Company Limited of Telangana) and
Another Versus Union of India & Others in Special Leave
Petition (Civil) Diary No. 25649/2024 and therefore the
petitioner herein is entitled for the relief as prayed for in the
present writ petition.
5. Learned Standing Counsel for TGSPDCL appearing on
behalf of respondent Nos.1 and 2 submits that as borne on
record, the petitioner in pursuance to the impugned demand
notice dated 31.01.2025 had made a detailed representation
dated 13.02.2025 addressed to the Superintending Engineer,
Operation Central Circle, TGSPDCL, Chandra vihar Complex,
6th floor, MG Road, Hyderabad, Telangana, i.e. 2nd
respondent herein requesting the 2nd respondent to withdraw
the impugned demand notice dated 31.01.2025 and to drop
further action arising out of the said notice, explaining that
the same is contrary to the orders of Division Bench of this
Court passed in W.P. No. 14918 of 2006 and batch and also
SN, J
5 WP_5121_2025
the order of the Apex Court dated 10.09.2024 passed in
Central Power Distribution Co. of A.P. Ltd., (Now
Southern Power Distribution Company Limited of
Telangana) and Another Versus Union of India &
Others in Special Leave Petition (Civil) Diary No.
25649/2024 and therefore the 2nd respondent may be
directed to consider the said reply/representation dated
13.02.2025 made by the petitioner in pursuance to the
demand notice issued to the petitioner for payment of Cross
subsidy Surcharge for the Financial Year 2005-06 to 2014-15,
within a reasonable period in accordance to law.
6. Taking into consideration :
(a) The facts and circumstances of the case,
(b) The submissions made by the learned Senior
Designated Counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel appearing
on behalf of respondents,
(c) The impugned demand notice dated
31.01.2025,
(d) The orders of the Division Bench of this
Court dated 19.12.2023 passed in W.P. No.
SN, J
6 WP_5121_2025
14918/2006 and batch and also the order of the Apex
Court dated 10.09.2024 passed in SLP No.25649 of
2024 of the respondent No.2 herein,
(e) The contents of the petitioner's
representation dated 13.02.2025 made in pursuance to
the impugned demand notice dated 31.01.2025 issued
to the petitioner by the 2nd respondent herein,
The writ petition is disposed of directing the 2nd
respondent to consider the representation dated
13.02.2025 made by the petitioner in pursuance to the
impugned demand notice dated 31.01.2025 issued to
the petitioner by the respondent No.2 in accordance to
law, in conformity with principles of natural justice by
providing an opportunity of personal hearing to the
petitioner and pass appropriate orders, within a period
of two (2) weeks from the date of receipt of the order.
Till the above exercise is initiated and concluded
by passing of appropriate orders by the 2nd respondent
duly considering the detailed representation dated
13.02.2025 filed by the petitioner before the 2nd
respondent against the impugned demand notice dated
SN, J
7 WP_5121_2025
31.01.2025 issued to the petitioner by the
respondent No.2 within the stipulated time period as
indicated above, as per the specific directions as
indicated above, the respondents are directed not to
take any coercive steps including that of disconnection
of power supply pertaining to the impugned demand
notice vide Lr.No. SE/OP/CC/HYD/ SAO/AAO(HT)/JAO
(H.T)/D.No.7077/2025, dated 31.01.2025 issued to
the petitioner by the 2nd respondent herein. There shall
be no order as to costs.
As a sequel, the miscellaneous petitions, if
any pending, in the Writ Petition shall also stand closed.
___________________________
MRS. JUSTICE SUREPALLI NANDA
Date: 20.02.2025
Skj
