Disposed¶41

M/s. Radha Smelters Limited, v. The Southern Power Distribution Company of Telangana Limited

Telangana HC28 Jan 2025WP/36736/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Radha Smelters Limited; open access; No Dues Certificate; Section 42 Electricity Act 2003; A.P. Electricity Regulatory Commission (Terms and Conditions of Open Access) Regulation 2005; TGSPDCL; TGTRANSCO; SLDC; TGERC; Article 226 mandamus; Articles 14, 19(1)(g), 21; interim orders dated 12.11.2015 in W.P.M.P. No. 47311 of 2015; Standing Clearance / No Objection Certificate; writ petition closed without costs; miscellaneous petitions closed; Medak; Sangareddy; Surepalli Nanda, J.; no adjudication on merits.

What did the court decide?

No substantive relief; writ petition closed recording that no further orders were necessary in view of the interim orders dated 12.11.2015 in W.P.M.P.No.47311 of 2015, with no order as to costs. ¶41

M/s. Radha Smelters Limited, Vs The Southern… — Writ and Judicial Review | Telangana HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

No substantive relief; writ petition closed recording that no further orders were necessary in view of the interim orders dated 12.11.2015 in W.P.M.P.No.47311 of 2015, with no order as to costs.

¶41

Issue for consideration

Whether the action of the respondents in insisting upon the petitioner to obtain a 'No Dues Certificate' from the 1st respondent for availing open access power is illegal, arbitrary and ultra vires of Section 42 of the Electricity Act, 2003 read with the A.P. Electricity Regulatory Commission (Terms and Conditions of Open Access) Regulation, 2005, and violative of the petitioner's fundamental rights under Articles 14, 19(1)(g) and 21 of the Constitution of India.

¶18

Ratio / Principle

The writ petition is closed with no order as to costs: the Court recorded the petitioner's submission that, by virtue of the interim orders dated 12.11.2015 in W.P.M.P.No.47311 of 2015, no further orders were necessary, a submission not disputed by learned Standing Counsel for TGSPDCL. The merits of the challenge to the 'No Dues Certificate' demand were not adjudicated.

¶41

Key takeaways

As a sequel to the closure of the writ petition, the miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in the writ petition also stand closed.ratio¶43

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ Petition No. 36736 of 2015, M/s. Radha Smelters Limited v. The Southern Power Distribution Company of Telangana Limited and others (High Court for the State of Telangana, Surepalli Nanda, J., 28-01-2025): The petitioner, an industrial consumer (Furnace Division, Ch. Shankarampet, Medak District), sought a writ of mandamus under Article 226 declaring illegal, arbitrary and ultra vires the respondents' insistence on a 'No Dues Certificate' from the 1st respondent (TGSPDCL) for availing open access power, as contrary to Section 42 of the Electricity Act, 2003 read with the A.P. Electricity Regulatory Commission (Terms and Conditions of Open Access) Regulation, 2005 and violative of Articles 14, 19(1)(g) and 21 of the Constitution. On 12.11.2015 the Court had passed interim orders in W.P.M.P. No. 47311 of 2015 directing the respondents not to insist on the No Dues Certificate as a condition precedent for issuing Standing Clearance/No Objection Certificate for open access. At final hearing, counsel for the petitioner submitted that, in view of those interim orders, no further orders were necessary; the learned Standing Counsel for TGSPDCL did not dispute the submission. The Court recorded the submission and closed the writ petition with no order as to costs; pending miscellaneous petitions also stood closed. The merits of the challenge to the No Dues Certificate demand were not adjudicated.

¶1

l32s2l

¶2

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA . AT HYDERABAD (S pecia I Ori gi naHurisd ictio n)

¶3

TUESDAY, THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MRS JUSTICE SUREPALLI NANDA

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO: 36736 OF 2015

¶7

Between:

¶8

M/s. Radha Smelters Limited, (Survice Connections Nos. tt/DK-1060), (Furnace Division), Sy No.327,328, Ch. Shankarampet (Village and Mandal) Medak District, Telangana State, rep by its Managing Director, lrilr. Sunil Saraf

¶9

...PETITIONER

¶10

AND

¶11

The Southern Power Distribution Company of.Telangana Limited, rep. by its Chairman and l/lanaging Director, I,4int Compound, Hyderabad, Telangana State.

¶12

The Superintending Engineer, Operation, the Southern Power Distribution Company of Telangana Limited, Ivledak District, at Sangareddy, Telangana State.

¶13

The Senior Accounts Officer, Operation, the Southern Power Distribution Company of Telangana Limited, Medak District, at Sangareddy, Telangana State.

¶14

The Transmission Corporation of Telangana. Limited, rep. by its Chairman and [/anaging Director, Vidyut Soudha, Hyderabad, Telangana State-

¶15

The Chief Engineer, SLDC, The Transmission Corporation of Telangana Limited, Vidyut Soudha, Hyderabad, Telangana State .

¶16

Telangana State Electricity Regulatory Commission, rep. by its Secretary, A.P. Singareni Bhavan, Red Hills, Hyderabad.

¶17

...RESPONDENTS

¶18

Petition under Article 226 of lhe Constitution of India^praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may^be pleased to issue a writ or order of direction more particularly one'in'the nature of Writ of [Vlandamus declaring the action of the respondents in insisting upon the petitioner to get No Dues Certificate from the 1st respondent for availing open access power as highly lllegal, arbitrary, unjust and ultra vires of Section^{42 of the} Eleitricity Act, 2003 read with the^provisions of the A.P. Electricity Regulatory Commission (Terms and Conditions of Open Access) Regulation^{2005 and also} violative of petitioners Fundamental Rightg^guaranteed under^{Articles14, 1 9(1} Xg) and 21 of the Constitution of lndia

¶19

¶20

l.A. NO: 1 OF 2015(WPMP. NO: 47311 OF 2015

¶21

Petition under^{.3ection'15'1} CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed n support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the respondents 4 and 5 not to insist upon the No Dues Certificate from the 1st respondent while iss.ring Standing clearance / No objection cerrtificate to the petitioner.to avail open ,.cess po*ei in terms of Section 42 of the Electricity Act, 20'13 pending disposal of the above writ petition.

¶22

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI D.V.NAGARJUNA BABU Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 TO 5: SRI N.SREEDHAR REDDy, SC FOR TGPSDCL Counsel for the Respondent No.6: SRI P.PRASAD, SC FOR TGERC

¶23

The Court made ithe following: ORDER

¶24

HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE S-UBEPALLI^NANDA

¶25

WRIT PETITION No.3673 of 2015

¶26

ORDER:

¶27

Heard Sri D.V.Nagarjuna Babu, learned^counsel appearing on behalf of the^petitaoner, Sri^N.Sreedhar Reddy, learned Standing Counse! for^TGSPDCL appearing on behalf of respondent^{Nos.1 to 5 and Sri} P.Prasad, learned Standing Counse!^forTGERC, appearing on behalf of respondent^No.6.

¶28

2. The^pe itioner aDDroac hed the Court^seekinq

¶29

praver as under:

¶30

"...to issue a writ or order of direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the^{respondents in insisting} upon the petitioner to^get "No^{Dues Certificate"from} the l't respondent for availing^{open access power as} highly illegal, arbitrary, unjust and ultra^{vires of} Section 42 of the Electricity^{Act, 2003 read with th9} provisions of the A.P.Electricity Regulatory Commission^(Terms and Conditions of^{Open Access)} Regulation 2005 and also violative of^petitionert Fundamental Rights^{guaranteedunder Articles 14,} 19(1)(g) and 21 of the Constitution^{of India.."'}

¶31

¶32

3 This Cou rt, on 12.1r201s, oassed nterim o ders ln W.P. .P.No.4 73 11 of 2015 in the orese nt writ oetition ob rn s u nder:

¶33

"Heard counsel for petitioner and standing cour sel for respondents.

¶34

Having regard to the fact that in s;imilar rnatters interim directions have been granted, therr: shall be interim direction to the respondents not to insist the petitioner on furnishing of^.No Due Certificate'as a condition precedent while ir;suing SitanJing Clearance/No Objection Certificate for providing open access to petitioner,,

¶35

4, It is represented by the learned counsel aprpearing on behalf of the petitioner that by virtue of the interim orders of this Court dated 12.11.2015 passed in W.p.M.p.No.473t1 of 2015 in the present rrrrit petition, no further orders are necess,try.

¶36

Sri lJ.Sreedhar Reddy, learned Standing (..ounsel for TGSPDCL apt)earing on behalf of the respondent Nos 1 to 5 has not disputed the said submission made by the learned counsel appearingr on behalf of the petitioner.

¶37

6 Bringing the said submission of the learned counser appearing on beharf of the petitioner on record,

the writ petition is closed. Ho!1/ever, there shall be no order as to costs.

¶42

As a sequel, the miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending

¶43

in the Writ Petition shall also stand closed.

¶44

SD/-V.KAVITHA ASSISTANT^REGISTRAR

¶45

//TRUE COPY//

¶46

S CTION OFFICER To 1. One CC to SRI D.V.NAGARJUNA BABU, Advocale-[OPUC] - - ^- i. 6;; 6c i;^{sHl r.r.snEeounnneooy,s-q} io-B-I-G-qPDcL^[oPUC] 5. 5;; ca E sRi^{p.pnasno,sc FoR rGERC[oPUC]}

¶47