Guguloth Rambabu Vs The Telangana State Power Generation Corporation Ltd.

Guguloth Rambabu, S/o Dasharath, ag ed about 35 years, Occ. Business and Contractor, R/o. Old Suraram v iilage, Paloncha Mandal, BhadradiKothagudem district.

¶10

Battu Laxman, S/o Babulu, aged about 44 years, Occ. Chairman, VTDA and Contractor, R/o. Karakavagu Village, Paloncha Mandal, BhadradiKothagudem district.

¶11

3 Clean and Green Earth Society, (Regd.No.3/2020), H.No.28-1-192, Karakavagu village, Paloncha Mandal, Bhadradi-Kothagudem district Rep. by its President Sri Battu Krishna

¶12

...PETITIONERS

¶13

AND

¶14

1 The Telangana State Power Generation Corporation Ltd, Rep. by its Chairman and Managing Director, Vidyuth Soudha, Hyderabad.

¶15

2 The Director Civilffhermal, Telangana State Power Generation Corporation Limited, (TS GENCO), Vidyut Soudha Hyderabad.

¶16

The Chief Engineer (Civil & Thermal), Telangana State of Power Generation Corporation Ltd, Vidyuth Soudha, Hyderabad

¶17

The Chief Engineer (O & M), Telangana State of Power Generation Corporation Ltd, KTPS-Vand Vl Stages, Poloncha. Kothagudem

¶18

The Chief Engineer (O & M), Telangana State of Power Generation Corporation Ltd, KTPS-VIl Stage, Paloncha, Kothagudem

¶19

...RESPONDENTS

¶20

Petition under Article 226 ot lhe Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a writ or order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the action of the respondent No.3 in issuing the Expression of lnterest (EOl) Notice No.01/CE/C/T/SE/C/ TCD-1 lEElClE&

¶21

F AIKT P S I P N202 5 d ated 25-Og^-2025 in P roc.^No. C E/C/T/SE()/TC^{D -} I^{lEEl C} lE&F DWI /Pond Ash/ KTPS /D.No.'153/25-26 dated 25-09-11025 inviting the Applications for Sale of Pond Ash / Wet Bottom Ash available at KTPS Complex, Paloncha, Bhad radri-Kothagudem district for the^year 2025-26 as bad, arbitrary, illegal, u ncon stitutio^{na I} and contrary to the Status^quo order daled 10-12-2024 in W.P.No.26B83 of 2024 and batch^passed by this Hon'ble Court and consequently direct the^respondents to consider the^petitioners representations dated 07-032025 for extension cf the validity of Sale Orders dated 30-08-2024, 11-09-2024, 24-09-2024 and 27-09-2024 issued to the Petitioner No. 1, Sale Order dated 2308-2024. 11-09-2024,24-09-2024 and 27-09-2024 issued to the^petitioner No.2 and Sale Orders dated 30-08-2024, 11-09-2024. 24-09-2024 and 27-09-2024 issued to the Petitioner No.3.

¶22

lA NO: 1 OF 2025

¶23

Petition unde. Section 151 CPC^praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the^petition, the High Court rnay be^pleased to suspend the operation of the Expression of lntere st (EOl) Notice No.01/CE/C/T/SE/C/TCD- 1/EE/C /Eand FA/KTPS/PA/2025 dated 25-09-2025 in Proc. No. CE/C/T/SE,' C/TCD-1 /EE/C/Eand F Dvn/ Pond Ash/ IiTPS/D. N o.1 5312526 dated 25-09-2025 issued by the respondent No.3 pending disposal of the above Writ Petition

¶24

lA NO: 2 OF 2025

¶25

Petition unde' Section 151 CPC praying that in the circurnstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the^petition, the High Court may be pleased pleased to implead the proposed respondents herein as respo rdents No: 6 and 7 to the above W.P.No:30354 of 2025

¶26

lA NO: 3 OF 2025

¶27

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the cir;umstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court oray be pleased to suspend the operation of the Proc.No: CE/C/T/SElCfiCDlIEEIC/E&F/KT^pS

¶28

PtuD,No: 18012025 dated 30-10-2025 issued by the respondent No:3 pending d isposal of the above writ petition

¶29

Counsel for the Petitioners : SRI C. DAMODAR REDDY, REP. FOR SRI C RUTHWIK REDDY

¶30

Counsel for the Respondents: SRI A. SUDERSHAN REDDY, (A.G)

¶31

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶32

THE HIfIi,BLE^{SRI JUSTICE NAGESH BHE]}MAPAKA}

¶33

wRIT PETITION No.3O354 of 2O2ti

¶34

ORDER:

¶35

This u,rit^petition challenges the action of^Re'spondent No.3 in issuing EOI Notice No.OllCElC 1'llSElC/TCDI I trE /^C I^tr&,FAlKTPS /PAl^{2025. and related proceedings dated} 25-09-2025 lor the^sale of^{Pond Ash} and^{Wet Bottom Ash from} KTPS-V.^{VI & VII stages for2025-26,contendrrg that such} actions^{were carried out contrary to the interim stiltusquo order} dated 10-12^{2024 in W.P. No. 26883 of 2024 and batch, and are} therefore^{bad, arbitrary,illegal, and unconstitutional.}

¶36

Heard Sri C.Damodar Reddy, learned Senior Counsel representing Sri^C. Ruthwik Reddy, learned cortnsel for^the petitioners and Sri A.Sudershan Reddy, learned Advocate General ior the respondents. Perused the record.

¶37

Learned counsel lor the petitioners submits that petitioners belongs to the Scheduled Tribe community from Old Suraram and Karakavagu villages in Bhadradri Kothagudem District, and their villages have been severely affected by p,rllution from Kothaguclem Thr:rmal Pou'er Station (KTPS), Paloncha. They were initiallv ailor.r,cd ro lift Fly Ash, Bottom Ash, and ])ond Ash at

¶38

2

¶39

.yEK,.t ll'. P.,'o-303 54 o12025

¶40

-'-1

¶41

Rs.50^{per MT under the Court's order dated O4.O4.2O24in W.P.} No.^{1126 1 of 2023, with Sale and Release Orders valid up to} 31.03.2025.,^{which they duly compliedrvith. After} the^period expired,^{theysubmittedrepresentationson07 .O3.2025} requesting^{extensionof the Sale Orders up to31.03.2026.} Despite^{Court directions on 1O.O4.2O25 and 11.04.2025 in W.P.} Nos. 1O977^{and 10979 of 2025 to consider their requests,the} respondents^{failed to act, prompting pending' contempt cases.} Meanrvhilc,^{other ST agencies'petitionsconcerning Pond Ash} allocation^{are under status quo ol'ders. 'I'he resportdentsthen} issued the^{impugnedEOI notice dated 25.O9.2025for sale of} poncl Ash and Wet Bottom Ash from KTPS 1t7, VI & VII Stages) without^{considering the petitioners' pending extensionrequests} and in^{violationof existing status quo ordcrs.The petitioners} argue that^{the EOI is vague,violates judicial directions,and could} cause law^{and order issues at the Ash Ponds due to inadequate} infrastructure^{and coordination, and thereforeseek suspensionof} the notice.

¶42

Learned counsel^{for the petitioners filed additionalaffidavit} stating that petitioners challenges the sale of Pond Ash and Wet Ash from KTPS Complex, Paloncha, under EOI dated 25-09-2025,

¶43

I

¶44

J

¶45

NBK, J rt'.P.No.3BSa of 2025

¶46

I

¶47

I

¶48

contending that^{despitecourt orders oo 07 -lO-2O25,13-10-2025,} and 21-1O-2O25 directing the^{respondentsr()t tofinalize} applications. Respondent No.3 issued^{Proc.No.lBt)/2O25} on 30lO-2O25 ar.rthorizing 79 firms to lift ash, ignoring 142 applical.ions and the ongoing Writ Petition. Petitioners contended that they previously lifted about 7,500 MT/day, totaling approximately 6 laktr MT in five months, and ha<l requested an extension ol Sale Orders from 01-04-2O25 to if^{-r)g-2026, with} equipment and Rs.l.5 crore deposits already on sile. They allege deliberate favoritism toward^politically connected firms and argue lhat the unauthorized issuance of Sale Orders violates court directions, causing potential irreparable loss and hardship, ald therefore seek suspension of Proc. No.lBO/2O25.

¶49

Learned counsel for the petitioners further placed on record the proceedings dated 30.10.2025, stating that T(-}GENCO filed Writ Appeal No.936 of 2025 against W.P.No. 11261 of 2023. This Court, on O8-O9-2O25, suspended the Single Judge's order of 04O4-2O24, allowing the State to clear fly ash ernd consider extension applications of the petitioners. rSubsequently, TGGENCO inviled EOI for disposal of 23,66,252 MT of^pond Ash/legacv ash (15,670 MT/day plus 469 MT/day wet bottom

¶50

{

¶51

]\RK, J l/.P.No.]03 S4 o.f 2025

¶52

ash) for FY 2025-26^{atRs'So/MT and approved79} frrms/agencies to lift^{ash from KTPS V' u & ulstages'} authorizing Chief Engineers^{to issue sale ordersas per EOI} terms, with the approval^{of CMD TGGtrNCO' He further enclosed} the annexure of 79 Agencies'

¶53

Learned Advocate^{Gcneral placed on record the letter dated} 22.O2.2022, wherein it is^{stated that the Government'sprimary} objective is to provide affordable^{electricity to consumers,and any} aclditional costs without monetLing^{ash disposal by Thermai} Power plants (Tpps) would^{increasethe electricity tariff,which} ultimateiy affects consumers.^{Since ash is a valuable by-product,} distributing it for free or covering^{transportationcosts could lead} ,! to malpractices.^. To ensure transparency and fairness, a competitive bidding or auction^{process is the} most^appropriate method to cletermine the sale rate^{of ash and other goods,thereby} helping to recluce the tariff burden' It^was further clarified that if some ash remains unutilized after the bidding process. it may be distributed free of cost on a first-come-first-served basis, provided the receiving agency bears the transportation expenses. This apprpach is intencled to streamline ash disposal, prevent misuse, and ensure that the benefits of monetizalion contribute to

¶54

I

¶55

l

¶56

NBK, J tl'. P.No.J03 54 of 2025

¶57

I

¶58

cheaper ekrctricity for consumers. He further errsured that they would approve the petitioners on par ri ith other Zg hrms/agencies to lift ash from KTpS V, Vl & VII stages, authorizing Chief Engineers to issue sale orders as per EOI terms, rvith the approval of CMD TGGENCO

¶59

Recording the said assurance, this Writ petition is disposed of directing the Officers and Authorities concerned to treat the petitioners on par with 79 approved firms/ageh<:ies, and to take necessary action to facilitate lifting of ash by the. petitioners in a timely manner. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶60

Pcnding miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand

closed.

l,/

i/TRUE COPY//

SD/-F' PoNJRISHNA ASSISTANT REGISTRAR 6-

¶65

]ECTION OFFICER