Dismissed

D.Maria Das v. The State of Telangana, And 4 Others

Telangana HC2 Jul 2025WP/4956/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A former telecom contract labourer absorbed into TSTRANSCO as Artisan Grade-II in 2017 sought notional seniority and pecuniary benefits from 1993 on par with similarly situated absorbed workers. The Court held he had accepted the absorption terms and belatedly sought relief, and dismissed the writ petition.

What the court decided

AI extract

D.Maria Das Vs The State of Telangana, And… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Telangana HC (2025)

¶1

,i -:

¶2

[³²⁵² ]

¶3

IN THE HIGH GOURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶4

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶5

{,r

¶6

WEDNESDAY,THE SECOND DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶7

PRESENT

¶8

THE HONOURABLE MRS JUSTICE SUREPALLI NANDA

¶9

WRIT PETITION NO:4956 OF 2021

¶10

Between:

¶11

I^{N/qia Das, Sio. Chalamaiah aged about 58 yearsArtisan Grade-ll Telecon} Sub-Division 400KVSS Srisaiiam Dam West Mahbubnagar District Temporarily residing at Rlo 26-10-414th lane Nagarmpalem Gunt-ur District.

¶12

...PETITIONER

¶13

AND

¶14

1 The State of Telangana, Rep by its Principal Secretary Department of Energy Secretariat Hyderabad-500022.'

¶15

2 Ttr_e Ielangana State Power Transmission of Corporation Limited, (TSTRANSCO) Rep. by its Chairman and Managing Director, Vidyuth Soudha Somajiguda Hyderabad -500082

¶16

¶17

3 The Chief General Manager HRD, The Telangana State power Transmission of Corporation- Lrmited (TSTRANSCO) Vidyuth Soudha Somajiguda Hyderabad -500082.

¶18

4 The Superintendent engineer, Tele communication Rural Circle The T.elangana StatePower Transmission of Corporation Limited (TSTRANSCO) Vidyuth Soudha Somajiguda Hyderabad -500082.

¶19

The Assistant Divisional engineer, Telecom The Telangana State power Tra.nsmission of Corporation Limited (TSTRANSCO) 220KVSS Kalwakurthy Mahaboob Nagar District 509 324

¶20

...RESPONDENTS

¶21

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 a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus to declaring the impugned action of the respondents in not allowing the petitioner the regular service and notional seniority w.e.f. 1-5-19g3 and pecuniary benefit w.e.f- 1-5-1993 while extending such benefits to all other contract labour absorbed under the scheme of absorption vide B.p.Ms.No.36, dated 1810511997 and B.P.Ms.No.271 and 212, dated 31112t1997 and B.P.Ms.No.326, dt.14-3- 1998 and thereby denying the petitioner the equal treatment and further action of the respondents in giving consolidate pay to the petitioner while fixing higher scale to all other contract labour absorbed under the

¶22

sameschemeishighlyillegal,arbitraryandviolativeofArticlel4'16and21ofthe airect the^{respondents to allowthe service} Constitution^{of lndia ,no} "6n."qu"nity benefit we.f^1-5-1993 ""i^{p;-;;;tibenefit from 1-5-1993as per B P M-s 326'} dt.14l3/g8 as^{allowed to tne ;tner sim-itaay situated persons videMemo No.CEE/O} and MJDR N',TTPS^{/Admlc a lr.alo No 2arctll, d| 1411212011as per the orders} of this Honorable^{Court in writ Petition No 217912006 Dt'1911112010.}

¶23

lA NO: 1 OF 2021

¶24

PetitionunderSectionl5lCPCprayingthatinthecircumstancesstatedin the affidavit^{filed in support of the petition'if'JUigf'Courtmay be pleasedto grant} i;t;; directions directing^{tne respondenti toconsiderthe case the} representation^{of the petitiorier for notional seniority w.e.f 1-5-1993and pecuniary} benefitw.e.f.g-12-gTonparwithothercontractLabourextendedwithsuchbenefit memo No CEE^{/O and Mon.NTTPSiAdm/C 3/ F 8/ D NO 2B13l11'dt'1411212011} in tn" rigl.,t of^{orders of this ionorable court in w.p.No.2179t2006dt.1911112010} and as^per B.P.[Is.No^{326 dt '1413/'1998}

¶25

Counsel for the^{Petitioner:SRl. G ALLABAKASH}

¶26

Counsel forthe^{RespondentNo.1: AGP FOR ENERGY}

¶27

Counsel for the^{RespondentNos.2to 5: Ms' K' UDAYASRISC FOR} TSTRANSCO

¶28

The Court made^{the following:ORDER}

¶29

¶30

HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUREPALLI NANDA

¶31

wRITP ET o N o.495 6() F o I

¶32

ORDER:

¶33

Heard Sri Allabakash, learned counsel appearang on behalf of the petitioner, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Energy appearing on behalf of the respondent No,1 and Ms. K.Udaya Sri, learned standing counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent Nos.Z to 5.

¶34

Th e petiti nera DDroa ch d the c u s ektn DTaver

¶35

as under:

¶36

"...to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus to declaring the impugned action of the respondents in not allowing the petitioner the regular service and notional seniority w.e.f 1.5.1993 and pecuniary benefit w.e.f. 1.5.1993 while extending such beneFits to all other contract labour absorbed under the scheme of absorption vide B.p.Ms. No.36, dated IB/OS/1gg7 and B.p.Ms.N o.27t and 272 dated 3I/12/t997 and B.p.Ms. No. 326 dt 14.3.1998 and thereby denying the petitioner the equar treatment and further action of the respondents in giving consolidate pay to the petitioner while fixing highe r scale to all other contract labour absorbed under the same scheme is highly illegal, arbitrary and violative of Article 14, 16 and 2I of the Constitution of India and

¶37

¶38

SN,^J

¶39

consequently^{direct the respondents to allow the service} benefit^{w.e.f 1'5'i993and pecuniarybenefit from} 1.5.1993^{as per B'P' Ms' 326' dt l4l3lg}as allowedto} the other^{similarly Situatedpersons vide MemoNo'} CEElo&^{MIDRNTTPS /Adm/C'3 lF' BID' N0' 2813/11'} dl 14/t:zl2ll1^{as per the orders of this Honorable Court} in writ^{PetitionNo' 2t7g/2}06'Dt :l9/ilLl2}70and} pass..."

¶40

a ft t n r inb ae e h ave rm^entsmad in the ffidavit filed v the^pe tit^{ioner ln} ntwrit^{Petitaon lsasunder} s D of th^e ore

¶41

The petitioner^{was engagedas a contractlabourer (skilled} worker)^{in the telecomdePartmentof TSTRANSCO (formerlY} APSEB),^{in the year 1993'The Government of AndhraPradesh'} through^{G.O.Ms.No'41 dated23'09'1996'prohibited engagement} of contract^{labour in variouslocationsof work' Pursuant to this'} TSTRANSCO^{issuedB'P'Ms'No'36dated 1B'05'1997and} B.P.Ms.No.326^{dated 14'03'1998 to absorb contract labour} working^{in abolished categories'granting them servicebenefits} w.e.f.^{06.12.1996 and pecuniary benefitsw'e'f' 09'12'1997'}

¶42

Despite^{being similarly placed'the petitionerwasnot} consideredforabsorptionundertheschemebytherespondents.

¶43

¶44

SN, J

¶45

The petitioner aggrieved by the same filed W.p. No. 4209/L999, in the erstwhile High Court, and the court directed the respondents to consider the petitioner.s case for regularization. The respondents called the petitioner for -an interview on 28.10.1997 and the petitioner appeared for the interview; however, no further action was taken. The petitioner was eventually absorbed on 29.O7.ZOL7 as Artisan Grade_II, on an "as- is-where- is', basis with no service benefits or pecuniary benefits.

¶46

It is further the case of the petitioner that other similarly situated persons in W.p. No. 2179/2006 and W.p. No. 17643/2012, were granted benefits under the scheme, including regularization, pay scales, seniority, and promotions but the petitioner was denied of similar treatment which has resulted in Ioss of pecuniary and service benefits. Despite the petitioner,s representation dated 03/2020, no action had been taken as on date. Aggrieved by the same the petitioner approached the court and filed the present writ petition.

4 E D R c

SN, J

i i I t I i I

A T e ro e in o c 5 d 29 20 7i u h 2dr o de r nt t n

¶54

extracted^hereunder:-

¶55

Whereas, the^{issue ofabsorption.of"Outsourced} TSTRANSCOⁱⁿ Personnel"^{u. piutlJ belore the B99r!} ^of its 19th^{aoatO Me"eii;g ntrO on 30-05-2017' The Board of} TSTRANSCO,^{alter peiusalof the proposalof absorption of} outsourced^{p"rso'ii- *orking inTSTTRANSCO' has} resolved to^{,egurJii'e the outs5urced Personnel' and that} a committee^{o" .onrtiirt"dto verifyand scrutinizeall the} applications^{recei;;;;;;submit the detailsto the Boardin} ineir next^{meetingfor further action'}

¶56

Whereas,^{in the reference 1st read above' a Committee} was constitut"O^{i" 'tt*titizethe "Bio-Data'particularsof} "Outsourced^{petsJnnef-asper the guidelines appended to} said order^{uno'-i'ornii- ils report to the Board'The} committee^{un"t. ,.iitinv of the "Bio-Data particulars_ofthe} "Outsourced^{p"tto"nefiubmitted its reporton t2-07-20t7} under^{reference 2nd read above'}

¶57

Whereas;^{theCommittee after.detailed} ,irrtinvlu"tincation^{of the bio-dataparticulars of the} personnel working^{in TSTRANSCO'.whichwas} "rtt"rii"O outsourced-^{PersonnelInformation} ,pioiJ"J-^'i" iLi".toprs)^{by the concerned Unit officers'and as per} iti;*;;);;li;6.'ir.r"o-^{nus identified the outsourced} p.ito"nn"t for absorption,^{as detailed below:}

¶58

Sl.No.	Name^of ZonelHOD	Highly skilled	Skilled	Semi- skilled	Unskilled	Total
1	Vidyut Soudha	25	151	L07	116	399
2	Hyderabad- Metro	181	280	103	183	747
3	Hyderabad- Rural	374	5s6	258	181	1369

¶59

¶60

SN, J

¶61

4	WarangaI Zone	480	713	271	218	1682
	Total	1060	170O	739	698	4797

¶62

Whereas, the ReDort of the Committee was placed before the Board of^'tnu- rsrnnNsl-O"in'"n-r-20,. Meeting held on 2B-07-2Ot7..for taking-i Ou.r1.ion on the recommendations of the Commiit"u foi-ltrorption of 4,797 "outsourced cont.acto.sTffi.,irrr,rXrTt"tl"1" "x??'r",,ff^{3l IX:} continuous/perennial nature of *o.k;';;;;' necessitates B(eight) hours whole -^time work in u O"u V in various lo^cations/offices oF TSTRANSCo-and"woitillru, on 4_72_ 2016, by re-desionaring-JF;-.; ;r,lr..' or..t"_r/Arrisan G rade-II/Artisa n 6rade_it rTArtisan ci"a":iv]' "'

¶63

Whereas, in the reference 3d read above, the Board in its 20 Board Meeting, resorved tnat-'tie- concerned appointing authorities be authorised to iirr"'i"n" orders for absorption of 4,L97 ',outsourced pui".r,"l,i'.s per the C_omunittee,s Report oatea-rz_ozlzb#,'=rrb".t to the approval by the comDetent authority in inl"6ouu.nrunt. ll::Illqlrt^{the proposatro. uoro'.piion'"or"ortror.."o} personnel as mentioned above *", - t.ittect to the Govern ment in the reFeren.e +li ieaolol]',ro.j'upp.oru r.

¶64

h int I n e 5 e v e or n u m n w s er din T n! n d

¶65

d er&al u 1 7 or 1 3 cil he to r fL o e m f lat nqanao el" fors absor Dtion of 4,L9 OUtso d IT r I ra ef a a

¶66

Gr r where-is basis.

¶67

v n ofTn ha r ar d al eI

<br>

SN,^J

a or io 19 rc n an TSTRA sco^on s-as- where-^{is basis.} the reference^{7th read} above,^the 8. Whereas,^ln onnel^working guidelines for^abs orption of^outsourced Pers in TSTRANSCO^AS on 4-12-2016^{were issued'}

¶73

Accordingly,^{after careful consideration' the Chief} ;;s;;;ryz;"es^{ana Joint secretarv' TSTRANSCO are} ;;;";;-;;th"rised^{to issue orders of absorption to the} ;;;;.."d personnel, whose^{namesare mentioned in the} inn-"rrr",^{appended to this order, subject to adherence to} ii.," gi,io;l^{iinesspecified in Para-10(iv)' (v)' (vii)' (ix) &} (vv) at the time of issue of orders^{of absorption'They shall} rorro* the^other suide^{lines as mentioned} :il ;;;;;utrv in^{para-rbunder reference 7th readabove'}

¶74

Consequent^{toabove, the concerned} ,^appointing urinoiiii"t^{J.e directed not to engageany new "outsourced} ;;;;;;;"1;^{in place of the absorbed personnel and shall not} [.4"J"r"^{any works involving deployment-of"outsourced} p"r*ri;i *itnbut^{obtaining prior approval of the corporate} Office. Further,^{the strengih of the "outsourcedpersonnel"} ituno. riu"r"a,^{ano herice,no new persons are to be} engageO^{for whatsoever reasons'In case there is any lapse} in'tr'ri.-r"tp"ct,^{such amount(s) will be-.debited to the} plrrorur^-i-.io,int of^{the concernedofficer(s)' besides} inltiuting^{disciplinaryaction as deemedfit' Further' they} tnfoimed inat tn"^{"outsourced personnel" now} ;;;';H oling ibtoio"d^{shall be absorbed on "as-is-where-is-basis"} unO^"no request^{for change of place of work will be} and they shall^{be required to dischargeany} "nt".tuin"O duty entrusted^{to them by the Corporation' In case any} cnange in the^{place of postingis contemplated,prior} apprdvat of^{the CorporateOffice should be obtained' duly} furnishing^{justificationfor such change'}

¶75

The specimen^{copy of absorptionorder, to be issued by} the concerned^{appointing authorityis enclosedherewith} along with specimen^{copy of attestation forms and medical} fitness certificate.

SN. J

1
t,l

They are directed to take action accordingly and report compliance forthwith.

¶80

1_3. These orders are issued with the concurrence of IMD (Fin., Commr & HRD) vide Resd.No.iii-, ii.'iilot_20L7

¶81

B P r N s t e o a d n h t r en o e a d

¶82

hereunder:-

¶83

In reply to averments m ade in para Nos. 2 & 3 it is submitted that the Writ petitioner's cl aim for absorption in terms of B.p. Ms.No.36. dated 1B-05-1997 or under B.P.Ms.No.37 dated 18-05- 1997 was not considered and he continued to be a contract Iabour till he was issued with absorption orders in terms of the scheme formulated b v the Telang ana State po wer Utilities.

7 R R I

I T

-l I

it I I 1, I i I I

SN,^J

b he te u rt . Be that^{as it} may, the^{said representationhas no merits}

¶91

In reply to^{averments made in ParaNo.4, itis} submitted^{that it is misconceived to contendthat all the} absorbed in^termsof contract labour^{have been} B.P.Ms.No.36,^{dated 18-05-1997R/w'} B.P. Ms. No.^326. of the^contract dated 14-03-1998.^{The absorption} Workers is^onlY labour/casual^{labour/VillageElectricity} 50o/o of the^{vacancies existing as on 18-5-1997 and the} Writ Peti tioner^{was not falling within the said vacancies.} Therefore,^{he wasnot consideredand as Per his own} averments,^{he wascontinued as contract workmen'The} it

¶92

f L 1 .t -71 hi The Writ^{Petitioner is not enti} tled to seek^{anY regular} benefits on P^{ar with other employees w.e.f. 1-5-1993.The} id the consolidated PaY of Writ Petitioner^was Pa the^{pendency of the W.P.} Rs.19,000/-^{per monthduring} (PIL) No. 149 of^{2017 and after the disposal of the W.P.} (PIL) No. 149 of^{2017, the WritPetitionerwas extended} the scale^of Pa^{y attachedto the Post of ArtisanGrade-IIon} par with similarly^{situated Artisanswho were absorbed} w.e.f .29-7-20L7. 9. In reply to^{averments made in Para No'5' itis} iubmitted tnat^{w.p.lto .2179of 2006is not applicable to} the Petitioner^{as he is not a party to the said Writ Petition'} The factsⁱⁿ the^{said Writ Petitionclearly demonstrate that} the relief^{was extendedto contract labour who were} absorbed in^{terms of B.P.Ms.No.37, dated 1B-05-1997} a7w. c.o.r"rr.No.41.^{dated 23-9-1996. Since the writ} Petitioner is^{not contract labour working in the prohibited} .ut"go.i"t^{as notified in G.O.Ms. No' 41' dated23-9-t996'} inO 6t he^{wasnot absorbed in terms of said B'P'Ms'37: he} is not entitled to^{any relief on par with the Petitionersin} W.P. No.2179 of^2006.

SN, J

It is submitted that the averments made i n Para No. 6 are equally devoid of merits. W.p. No.17643 of 2012 is filed by the contract workmen who were absorbed in terms of B.P. Ms. No. 37 272 dated 31-12-t997 datedand 18-05-1997 in the posts and sanctioned B.p. Ms. No.in terms of B.p.Ms.No.326 dated 14-03-1998 P t on dr o art n a rmla OU w o.ki srnce s. o.4thee a 2 1 6 h ts o n or b on avr t s n .P M e e37 rd ed n18to5tn99 a he 2 o w n !V h w a sor as s I n er s th s e w. f 9- 7 o H ts o n le t lai n t r h er d rl 2 7 o17

¶97

It is submitted that there are no merits in the Writ Petition and the writ petition is tiabte t;be;i;;issed.

¶98

I U I A D o L I

¶99

5, Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner mainly contends that the servaces of the petitioner should be regularized and notional seniority accorded to the petitioner w.e.f.O1.05.1993 and pecuniary benefits w.e.f. O1.OS.1993 as per BpMS No.36, dated 18.05.1997, since the petitioner had been working in respondent organization w.e.f. O1.O5.1993 as outsource employee and had been absorbed as Artasan Grade_ff in TSTRANSCO w.e.f. 29.O7.2OL7.

SN, J

Learned counsel^{appearingon behalf of the petitioner} further submits that^{the petitionersuperannuatedon} O1.07.2020 and^{prior to the superannuation ofthe} petitioner, petitioner^{vide representationaddressedto the} Chairman &^{Managing Director, TSTRANSCO,Vidyut} Soudha, Hyderabad^{requested to consider the previous} service of the^{petitioner for the purposeof pensionand} other benefits^{as per B.P.Ms.No'36,dated 18'05'1997'but} however no action^{had been initiated on the said} representation^{as on date and aggrieved by the same' the} petitioner approached the^{Courtby filing the present Writ} Petition.

¶104

7, Learned counsel^{appearingon behalf of the petitioner} places reliance on the iudgment^{dated 19'11'2010 passed} in w.P.No.2L7g of^{2OO6 and also the iudgmentof this} court, dated 24.LL.2024^{passed in w.P.No.7343of 2O19} and contends that^{the petitioner is entitled for the relief} as prayed for by^{the petitioner in the present writ} Petition.

t"
(

,,. )

SN, J

Learned standing counset appearing on behalf of the respondent Nos,2 to 5 on the other hand placing reliance on the averments made in the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the respondents in particular paia Nos,7, g and 10 (referred to and extracted above) contends that the petitioner is not entitted for absorption in terms of B.P.Ms.No.36, dated 18.OS.1997 or under B.p.Ms.No.37, dated 18.05.1992 c ti o er u da tr a u u h b r ta n rd rs n r of s la e b t T n s t P ti s n h s h e w r n a e on lor oncontract basis ndw ho futfitled oth erco nditions were a s rbed on s-,s-where-ts basis a nd t eDe titioner be m ane MDlo eeofT elanqa na state Power Utititres o In m t h d t 9 7 o 7 t o1 n e ta on rc n t s k ef rt r I er's tr ot n e ti n r ti o s a

SN, J

9 Learned standing^{counselappearing on behalf of the} respondent^{Nos.2 to 5submits} that the Petitioner the rePresentation superannuated^{on 30.06.2O2O and} alleged to^{have been made in the monih of March'2O2O'} had not been^{acknowledged by the respondents and the} petitioner having accepted^{the absorption as Artisan} Grade-II, vide^{proceedingsdated 29'07'2Ot7as per the} terms of the^{settlement cannot turn back and seek} regutarization of^{servicesw.e'f' 1993 and the petitioner} failed to challenge^{the said proceedings, dated 29'O7'2OL7} as on date and^{therefore,the petitioner is not entitled for} the relief as^{prayedfor by the petitioner in the present} Writ Petition^{and the Writ Petition itself is misconceived'}

¶116

ba er lof c nt ft ro ln dated 29. 07.20L7 filed on behalf^{of theresoondentNos.2} to in su oort of the unter: affidavi t^{filedinthe ore} nt Writ Petiti on clearlv at Dara No.6 indicate that the me orand mof Settlem ent^{was entered in} with the Tra nl r ti t2 of In rI Diso utes Act L947 before the Conciliation Officer & Com issioner of Labo r, Governmen tof Telanqana for

l T i ; I

SN, J

bs r n f 1 u e n Gr I n r I f I rti n a v na -lsh -l b ts nd TN rob nt a val e v r n f an na or b n th sar 4 97 ou o onn tn T N c n -wh f srs to rh n

¶122

This Court opines that the petitioner retared from the services on 30.06.2020 on attaining the age of superannuation and having failed to challenge the proceedings dated Zg.O7.201-7 issued by the Znd respondent til! as on date and the fact as borne on record that the petitioner had been regurarized w.e.J.29.o7.2oL7 and the petitioner having never at any point of tame earlier having sought regularization of services w.e.f. the date of petitioner,s initial appointment i.e., in the year 1993 the petitioner cannot seek the said retief by filing the present Writ petition in the year 2021.

¶123

This Court opines that the petitioner is not entifled for grant of relief as prayed for in the present writ petition

, I t I I ,l I

I I I

SN, J

in the light of discussion^{and conclusion as arrived at as} above at^{paras 5 to 11 of the present iudgment'}

¶131

Taki o into consl^deratin:-

¶132

a) The aforesaid^{facts and circumstancesof the case'} The submissions^{made by the tearned counsel} b) appearing on behalf^{of the petitionerand learned standing} counsel appearing^{on behalf of the respondent Nos'2 to 5'} c) The averments^{made in the counteraffidavit filed on} behalf of the^{respondents(referred toand extracted} above)

¶133

d) The contents^{of the proceedings,dated 29'07'2Ot7 ot} the 2nd respondent^{pertaining to the absorptionof 4,L97} outsourced^{personnelengagedin corporateOffice& Zones} through certain^{Contractors/Agencies/Firms for execution} of certain continuous/perennial^{nature of whole-time} duration works^{in TSTRANSCO(referred to and extracted} above)

¶134

e) Para Nos.6^{& 7 of the proceedings,dated29.O7'2OL7} which clearly indicates the^{memorandumof settlement} having been entered into^{with the Trade Unionsunder} Section 12(3) of the Industrial^{Disputes Act, L947 before}

¶135

¶136

SN, J

¶137

the Conciliation Offacer & Commissioner of Labour, Government of Telangana for absorption oJ 4,I,gz "outsourced personnel in TSTRANSCO on as_is_where_is basis and the Government of Telangana accorded approval for the same.

¶138

This Court opines that the judgments relied upon by the learned counset appearing on beharf of the petitioner do not apply to the facts of the present case and hence, pleas put-forth by the petitioner on the basis of the saad judgments are untenable and hence rejected.

¶139

The Writ petition ts dismissed, since the same ts devoid of merits. However, there shail be no order as to costs.

¶140

Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this Writ Petition, shall stand closed.

¶141

¶142

SD/-M. JAWAHAR REDDY ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

//TRUE COPY//

SECTI FFICER

To,

,| One CC to SRl. G ALLABAKASH Advocate [OPUCI 2 One CC to Ms K UDAYA SRI SC FOR^TSTRANSCO [OPUC] J Two CCs to GP FOR ENERGY,High Court^for the^{State of Telangana} tourl 4 Two CD Copies KKS o B

CC TODAY

HIGH^COURT

DATED:0210712025

ORDER

WP.No.4956^{ot 2021}