Disposed
M/s. Suryalata Spinning Mills Ltd., v. The Sothern Power Distribution Company of
Telangana HCWP/37407/2015
Case brief
from the order text
What is this about?
COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT…
What the court decided
AI extract
COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT…
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
132521
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction)
TUESDAY, THE THIRD DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MRS JUSTICE SUREPALLI NANDA
WRIT PETITION NO: 37407 OF 2015
Between:
M/s. Suryalata Spinning Mills Ltd., (Service Connection bearing No MBN-678) Urukondapet Village, Midjil Mandal, Mahaboobnagar Districtrep . by its Joint IVlanaging Director, Mahendra Kumar Agarwal.
...PETITIONER
AND
...RESPONDENTS
Petition under Article 226 of the Constitutionof lndia praying thatin the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith,the High Courtmaybe pleased to issue a writ or order of direction moreparticularly one in the natureof Writ of Mandamus declaring the Proceedings No. SE/OP/MBNR/SAO/HT/D.No. 338/15 dated 16.06.2015 of the 2nd respondent ashighlyillegal, arbitrary,unjust and opposed to the Principles of Natural Justice, contraryto the central Electricity Regulatory Commission(Unscheduled Inter-ChangeCharges andRelated Matters) Regulation 2009 and the CentralElectricity Regulatory Commission
(Deviation, Settlement Mechanism and Relevant Matters) Regulation, 2O14 and violative of Articles 1a, t9(1)(g), 21,265 and 300-A of the Constitution of lndia and consequently set aside the same.
l.A. NO: 1OF 2015(WPMP.NO: 48139 OF 201s)
Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of thepetition, the High Courtmay bepleasedto direct the respondentsnot to disconnect thepetitioner's power supplypursuantto Proceedings No SE/OP/MBNR/SAO/HT/D. No. 338/'15 dated 16.06.2015 of the 2nd respondentpending disposal of the above writpetition.
l.A. NO: 2 OF 201s(WPMP. NO: 50692 OF 2015)
Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of thepetition, the High Court may bepleased to extend the time by 4 weeks from today for submitting the objections by the petitoiner as directed by this Honourable Court in order clated 18.'l 1.2015 in WPIvIP No. 4813912015in WP No. 37407 of 2015.
Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI D.V.NAGARJUNA BABU
Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1to4:SRl R.VINOD REDDY, SC FOR TSSPDCL Counsel forthe Respondent No.S: SRI J.ASHVINI KUMAR,(SC FOR TSERC) The Court made the following:ORDER
HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE SUREPALLI NANDA
w N
ORDER:
Heard Sri D.V. Nagarjuna Babu, I rned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, Sri R. Vinod Reddy, learned Standing Counsel r TSSPDCL, appearing on behalf of respondent Nos. 1 4 and Sri P. Prasad, learned Standing Counsel for angana State r Electricity Regulatory Commission, appea ing on behalf of respondent No.5.
prayer as under:
'...to issue a writ or order of direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the Proceedings No. SE/OP/MBNR/SAO/HT/ D.No.33B/15 dated 16.06.2015 of the 2nd respondent as highly illegal, arbitrary, unjust and opposed to the principles of natural justi ,contra ry to the Central Electricity Regulatory ommrsston (Unscheduled Inter-Change Charges a d Related Matters) Regulation 2009 and the Centr Electricity Regulatory Commission (Deviation Settle m ent Mechanism and Relevant Matters) Regul on, 2074
I
2
wP 17407 2015
and violative of Articles14, 19(1)(9)21, 265 and 300-A of the Constitutionof India and consequently set aside the same and Pass...".
3 This Cou rt oassed interim order in favourof the petitioner on 18.11.2015 in W.P.M.P. No, 48139 of o1s
obse rnq as u der:
"Heard the counsel for petitioner, and Sri R. Vinod Reddy, learned StandingCounsel for TS S.P.D.C.L For respondents.
Sri R. Vinod Reddy, learnedStanding Counsel for TS. S.P.D.C.L.,takes notice on behalf of respondent Nos.1 to4.
Having regard to the contentions ofboth parties that respondents are open to considering the objections ofpetitioner,liberty is given to petitioner to approach the respondents withina period of two (02) weeks from today with the objections to the order dt.16.06.2015passedby 2nd respondent, and the respondents aredirected to consider the objections raisedby petitioner within aperiod of four(04) weeksfrom the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
Pending consideration of the objections of petitioner, the respondents shall not take any coercive steps againstpetitioner.
Post after four (04) weeks".
J
,/
wP i7407 2015
As a sequel, the miscellaneouspetitions, if
any,pending in the WritPetition shallalso standclosed.
\
SD/- N.SRIHARI ASSISTANT REQTSTRAR t //TRUE COPY// L_ ___ I SECTION OFFICER To, l One CC toSRID.VNAGARJUNA BABU,Advo-cate-.LQtqql.^. i 5nE dd io5Hi l.AdHvitlrKUMAR,(sc FoRrsE-Rc) {oPUCl 5 il; 66 i"Srii n.vtttboREDDY,sc FoR rssPDCLIoPUC] 4. Two CDCopies. 8SK LS
%
HIGH COURT
DATED:0310912024
1 E 4
'\Q/OY
*
aC
,c' s
't_ a.
ORDER 'r +\ I
tIOcJ
WP.No.37407 of 201201
'+
rt /
.:) ti s\1
WP.No.37407 of 201201
CLOSING THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS
p
1 issue framed by the court
Should proceedings dated 16.06.2015 imposing charges contrary to CERC regulations be declared illegal and set aside?
2 provisions across 2 enactments
M/s. Suryalata Spinning Mills Ltd. (rep. by Joint Managing Director Mahendra Kumar Agarwal)
The Southern Power Distribution Company of Telangana Limited
The Superintending Engineer, Operation, Southern Power Distribution Company of Telangana Limited, Mahaboobnagar
The Senior Accounts Officer, Operation, Southern Power Distribution Company of Telangana Limited, Mahaboobnagar
The Transmission Corporation of Telangana Limited
Telangana State Electricity Regulatory Commission
Surepalli Nanda
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court