M/s. Minerva Grand Hospitalities v. Southern Distribution Company of Telangana Limited
Case brief
What is this about?
THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special…
THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special…
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
HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction)
THURSDAY, THE TWENTY SEVENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MRS JUSTICE SUREPALLI NANDA
WRIT PETITION NO: 5834 OF 2025
Between:
M/s. Minerva Grand Hospitalities, having its registered Office at Plot No.853/14 Road No.44, Jubilee Hills, Hyderabad Telangana 500033, Rep by its Partner Mr. Mereddy Kalyan.
...PET]TIONER
AND
...RESPONDENTS
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 pass an order or orders or writ or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of Respondents in issuing demands for payment of Cross Subsidy Surcharge ("CSS") for the FY 2005-06 to 2014 15 vide Lr.No.SE/OP/B'Hi||s/Hyd/SAO/JAO/HT/ DNo.396/24 dt.O1 .02.2025, issued by the 2nd Respondent, purported to be based on the Tariff Order dated 3O.O8.2O24 issued by the Telangana Electricity Regulatory Corn Commission determining the CSS for FY 2005-06 to 2014-15, as arbitrary, illegal contrary to the Judgment dated 19.12.2O23 of this Hon'ble Court in W.P.No.14918 0 2006 and batch, p.roriisions of the Electribity Act, 2003, besides being violative of the petitione/s rights guaranteed under Article 14, 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of lndia and consequently set aside the same.
lA NO: 1 OF 2025
Petition under Section 151 CPCpraying thatin the circumstancesstated in the affidavit filed in support of thepetition,the High Court may be pleased to direct the Respondents not to take any coercivestepsincludingthat of disconnectionof power supply pursuant to the demand notice vide Lr.No.SE/OPiB'Hills/Hyd/SAO/JAO/HT/DNo.396/24dated 01 .02.2025issued by the 2nd o Respondent.
Counsel for the Petitioner:M/S INDUSLAW FIRM
Counsel for the Respondents: SRIN. SREEDHAR REDDY, SC The Court made the following: ORDER
7^
HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICESUREPALLI NANDA
WRIT PETITION o.5834 0F 2025
ORDE R:
Heard Sri N.V. Sumanth,learnedcounsel appearing on behalf of thepetitionerand SriN. Sreedhar Reddy, learned StandingCounsel appearing on behalf of respondentNos.1 and 2.
" ...to issue an order or orders orwrit or direction more particularly one inthe natureof Writ of Mandamus declaring the actionof Respondents in issuing demands forpayment ofCrossSubsidy Surcharge(CSS) forthe FY 2005-06 to 2014-15 vide Lr. No.SE/OPlB'Hills/Hyd/SAO/lAO/Hr/ D.No.396/24 dt.01.02.2025,issuedby the 2nd Respondentpurported tobe based on the Tariff Order dated 30.08.2024issued by the Telangana Electricity RegulatoryCommissiondeterminingthe CSS for FY 2OO5-06 to2014-15 as arbitrary,illegal, contrary to the Judgmentdated 19-12-2023of this Hon'ble Court in W.P. No.14918 of 2006 and batch, provisions of the Electricity Act, 2003besidesbeing violative of thepetitioner's rights guaranteedunder
)
wP 5834 2025
Articles 14, 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India and consequently set aside the same and pass... ".
SN, J 3 wP 5834 2025
7
(a) The aforesaid facts and circumstances of the
case,
(b) The submissions made by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and
(
4
wP 5834 2025
learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of respondent Nos.1 and 2,
(c) The fact as borne on record that no orders had been passed on petitioner,s representation dated 22.02.2025 issued to the 2nd respondent herein in pursuance to the impugned letter dated 01.02.2025 issued to the petitioner herein by the 2nd respondent,
The writ petition is disposed of directing the 2nd respondent to consider the grievance of the petitioner as put forth vide petitioner,s detaited representation dated 22.O2.2025 addressed to the 2nd respondent herein in pursuance to the impugned demand notice dated 01.O2.2025 issued to the petitioner herein by the 2nd respondent, in accordance to taw, in conformity with principles of natural justice by giving reasonable opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner, within a period of three (3) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
Till the above exercise is initiated by the 2nd respondent herein and concluded by passing of appropriate orders by the 2nd respondent duty
5 wP 5Ei4 2025
7
considering thegrievance of the Petationer as Put forth by the petitioner videpetitioners representation dated 22.O2.2025 as per the directions as indicated as above within the time period as stipulated as above, the respondents are directed not to initiate any coercive steps with respect to the impugned demand notice dated 01.02.2025 issued to thepetitioner by the 2nd respondent. However, there shall be no order as to
costs.
if As a sequel, the miscellaneouspetitions,
any,pending in the Writ Petition shall also stand closed.
SO/.MOHO,ISMAIL AS ANT REGISTRAR ECTION OFFICER
//TRUE COPY//
TJ
BS $
HIGH COURT
CC TODAY
DATE D :27 10212025
ORDER
WP.No.5834 ot 2025
'E STATE oA
o
I
1$ ths lffi
,.)
*
t
DE ...t,1 .'
;-i'/
DTSPOSING OF THE WRITPETITION
WITHOUT COSTS
eJ'?"W
4 provisions across 3 enactments
M/s. Minerva Grand Hospitalities, Rep by its Partner Mr. Mereddy Kalyan
Southern Distribution Company of Telangana Limited (TSSPDCL), Rep by its Chairman and Managing Director
The Superintending Engineer, TGSPDCL, Operation Circle Banjara Hills, Hyderabad
Surepalli Nanda
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court