Disposed

M/s. L K S Classic Restaurant and Bar, v. The Southern Power Distribution Company of Telangana Ltd.

Telangana HC16 Dec 2024WP/24125/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a writ petition filed by a restaurant challenging dues orders. The court accepted that dues were paid and granted liberty to the petitioner to approach the corporation for a refund of any excessive payment, with no order as to costs.

What did the court decide?

Liberty granted to petitioner to approach respondents by way of representation for refund of amounts if any paid excessively; consideration to be made as per law expeditiously.

M/s. L K S Classic Restaurant and Bar, Vs The… — Service and Employment | Telangana HC (2024)

¶1

l32s2l

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶3

(Speciat Original Jurisdiction)

¶4

IVONDAY, THE SIXTEENTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HONOURABLE MRS JUSTICE SUREPALLI NANDA

¶7

WRIT PETITION NO: 2412 5 0F 2016

¶8

Between:

¶9

M/s.LKS classic Restaurant and _Bar, Rep by its Managing partner p.Kumar, S/o. L.ate P Mailesh, fg.e a3 years, R/o.37-1261it1, Sri Coion"y trrtain-noiO', Opp Sef Defence Colony,Malkajgiri, R R District - 500056.

¶10

...PETITIONER

¶11

AND

¶12

The Southern Power Distribution Company of Telanqana Ltd. Reo. Bv S.E. Operations Ranga Reddy District, Easi Ciicle, Rangi Reddy Oistiict.'^{- -}

¶13

The Vidyut Ombudsman for the State of Telangana, 1st Floor, 33/1 1 KV Substation, Hyderabad Boats Club, Lumbini p5rk, Hyderabad'

¶14

The Consumer Grrevances Redressal Forum of TSSpDCL. (Greater llylglglrO^{Area).D_o_orNg B-3-167tEt1, Central power Trairiing tnstitute} (CPTI) Premises, TSSPDCL, GTS Cotony, Vengal Rao Nagar,trragJdda, Hyderabad-45.

¶15

- In". Divrsional Engineer, Operations, Sainikpuri, Elect, TSSpDCL, Ranga Reddy District.

¶16

The ADE Operations, TSSPDCL, AS Rao Nagar, Ranga Reddy District.

¶17

The AAO/ EERO, Sainikpuri, TSSpDCL, Ranga Reddy District.

¶18

The AE/OP, TSSPDCL, Neredmet, Ranga Reddy District.

¶19

...RESPONDENTS

¶20

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 issue Order or Orders, Directions or Directions, Writ or Writs particularly one in the certiorari or any other appropriate writ call for the records pertaining to Appeal No.27 of 2016 of Vidyut ombudsman for the State of Telangana, set aside aside the award dated 12.o7.20i6, wherein it has confirmed the orders of the CGRF of TSSpDCL passed vide CG No.666/2015 _ 16, Ranga

¶21

.:r:9 ,r

¶22

Reddy, East Circle dated 16.04.2016 consequently set aside the final assessment orders issued by the 4th respondent vide No.DE/OP/SNKP/D.No.-16/2016 dated 20.04.2016.

¶23

l.A. NO: 2 OF 2016(WPMP. NO: 29725 OF 2016)

¶24

Petition under Section 1 51 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 disconnect the Service Connection No.12063711754 standing in the name of Sri P.Krishna for non-payment of amount covered by the impugned order^pending disposal of the above writ petition.

¶25

l.A. NO:'t OF 2016(VWMP. NO: 3697 OF 2016)

¶26

Between:

¶27

M/s.LKS Classic Restaurant and Bar, Rep by its l/anaging Partner P.Kumar, S/o. Late P Mallesh, Age 43 years, R/o.37-1261111, Sri Colony lt4ain Road, Opp SBI Defence Colony,Malkajgiri, R R District- 500056.

¶28

...PETITION ERS/RESPONDENTS

¶29

AND

¶30

1 The Southern Power Distribution Company of Telangana Ltd, Rep. By S.E. Operations Ranga Reddy District, East Circle, Ranga Reddy District.

¶31

2 The Vidyut Ombudsman for the State of Telangana,^'l st Floor, 33/1 I KV Substation, Hyderabad Boats Club, Lumbini Park, Hyderabad

¶32

? The Consumer Grievances Redressal Forum of TSSPDCL, (Greater Hyderabad Area), Door No 8-3-167/E/1, Central Power Training lnstitute (CPTI) Premises, TSSPDCL, GTS Colony, Vengal Rao Nagar, Erragadda, Hyderabad-45

¶33

4 The Divisional Engineer, Operations, Sainikpuri, Elect, TSSPDCL, Ranga Reddy District.

¶34

5 The ADE Operations, TSSPDCL, AS Rao Nagar, Ranga Reddy District.

¶35

6 The AAO/ EERO, Sainikpuri, TSSPDCL, Ranga Reddy District.

¶36

Z-^{fhe A9OP- TSSPDCL, Neredrlet, Ranga ReddyDistrict.,}

¶37

...RESPONDENT/PETITIONER

¶38

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

¶39

vacate the interim orders dt.25-07-2016 in^{WP.MP.No -29725 of 2016in} WP.No.241 25 ol 2016 and dismiss the^WP.

¶40

Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI VIJAY B PAROPAKARI

¶41

Counsel for the Respondents : SRI R.VINOD^{REDDY, SC FOR TGSPDCL}

¶42

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶43

HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE^{SUREPALLI NANDA}

¶44

WR T PET N .24 2 OF 1

¶45

ORDER:

¶46

Heard Sri Vijay^{B Paropakari, learned counselappearing} on behalf of^{the petitioner and Sri R'Vinod Reddy, learned} Standing Counsel^{for TGSPDCL,appearing on behalf of the} respondents.

¶47

2 The ition ET ADDroached the Court^{seekinqoraveras}

¶48

under:

¶49

"...to issue Order or^{Orders, Directionsor Directions,} Writ or Writs^{particularlyone in the Certiorarior any other} appropriate Writ call^{for the recordspertaining to Appeal} No.27 of 2Ot6 of^{Vidyut Ombudsmanfor the Stateof} Telangana, set aside^{the awarddated72'07 '2016wherein it} has confirmed the^{orders of the CGRF of TSSPDCLpassed} vide CG No.666/2015-16,^{Ranga Reddy, East Circledated} 16.04.2016 consequently^{set aside the final assessment} orders issued^{by the 4th respondentvide No'DE/OPISNKP/D'} No.76l2Ol6 dated^{20.04.2016 and to pass suchorder or} orders as this Hon'ble^{Court may deemsfit just and properin} the circumstances^{of the case."}

¶50

It is^{representedby the learned counsel appearingon behalf} of the^{petitionerthat the petitioner had paid the entire dues to the}

¶51

¶52

respondent-corporation and there are no dues to be paid by the petitioner to the respondent corporation.

¶53

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner further submits that the petitioner may be given liberty to file a representation to the respondents herein for recovery of amounts if any due to be adjusted by the respondents in favour of the petitioner.

¶54

Sri R.Vinod Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for TGSPDCL, appearing on behalf of the respondents does not dispute the said submission made by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner.

¶55

Bringing the said submission of the learned counse! appearing on behalf of the petitioner on record, the writ petition is disposed of by giving liberty to the petationer to approach the respondents by way of representation for refund of amounts if any paid by the petitioner excessively to the respondents herein and on receipt of the same, the respondents shall consider the same in accordance with law as expedatiously as possible. However, there shall be no order as to costs.

¶56

¶57

As a sequel, the miscellaneous petitions,

¶58

¶59

any, pending in the Writ petition shall also stand closed.

¶60

SD/.V.KA THA ASSISTANT REGI RAR

//TRUE COPYII

SECTION FFICER

To,

The S.E. Operations, Southern Power Distribution Company of^Telangana Ltd, Ranga Reddy District, East Circle, Ranga Reddy District.

¶65

The Vidyut Ombudsman for the State of Telangana, 1st Floor,^{33/1 1 KV} Substation, Hyderabad Boats Club, Lumbini Park,^Hyderabad

¶66

The Consumer Grievances Redressal Forum of^{TSSPDCL, (Greater} Hyderabad Area), Door No 8-3-167/E/1 , Central Power Traininq^lnstitute (CPTI) Premises, TSSPDCL, GTS Colony, Vengal Rao Nagar, Erragadda, Hyderabad-45.

¶67

The Divisional Engineer, Operations, Sainikpuri, Elect,^{TSSPDCL. Ranga} Reddy District.

¶68

The ADE Operations, TSSPDCL, AS Rao Nagar,^{Ranga ReddyDistrict.}

¶69

6 The AAO/ EERO, Sainikpuri, TSSPDCL, Ranga Reddy^District.

¶70

The AE/OP, TSSPDCL, Neredmet, Ranga Reddy Distrlct

¶71

On: CC to SRI VIJAY B PAROPAKARI, Advocate. [OPL,C]

¶72

9 One CC to SRI R VINOD REDDY, SC FOR TGSPDCL [OPUC]

¶73

10 Two CD Copies.

¶74

BSKGJP^flk

¶75

HIGH COURT

¶76

DATED:1 611212024

¶77

1 tre sr416
(
(y
il
o).L 0 f iii'i 2[25 C ,l
\r,)', /
-../
,;:'.|,1|.,.''./'

¶78

ORDER

¶79

WP.No.24125 of 2016

¶80

DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS

¶81

T{l;'1s-

M/s. L K S Classic Restaurant and Bar, v. The Southern Power Distribution Company of Telangana Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/s. L K S Classic Restaurant and Bar, v. The Southern Power Distribution Company of Telangana Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/s Dhanalakshmi Iron Industries Limited Vs A.P. Electricity Regulatory Commission, rep. by its

Smt. L. Vijayalaxmi Vs Sri R.Raghunandan Rao, IAS

Agiru Narender Kumar Vs The State of Telangana

Mohammed Omer Vs The State of Telangana

Managing Partner, M/S.G.Vikas Reddy and Co., Hyderabad Vs Md, Ts Medical Services and Infrastructure, Hyd and Another

M/s. Balaraj Manpower Supply and Contract Services Vs The Telangana State Road Transport Corporation