The Superintending Engineer Operation v. Sri. Anil Kumar
Court: High Court for State of Telangana
Bench: RENUKA YARA
Judgment date:
Case summary
High Court for State of Telangana judgment dated 2026-02-03. The Superintending Engineer Operation v. Sri. Anil Kumar. Read the judgment and case details on...
Judgment text
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Speciat Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE THIRD DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE RENUKA YARA WRIT PETITION NO: 24522 OF 2024 Between 1- The.. Supejintending. Operation, Rajendranagar, . Engineer Telangana southe rn Powe r D i Stri b utr-o n com pan y Lim ited,' Rajend rinagar ci rcie. 2- Superintending Engineer, DPE, Ih".. Corporate office, Telanqana Southern Power Distribution Company Limited, Hyderitbad 3. The Divisional. Engineer, operation, Rajendranagar Telangana State Southern Power Distri bution- com pa ny Li m ited, daieAo rin"aga r Ci icie. 4. The Assistant Accounts officer, ERo, Gaganpahad, Tetanqana Southern Power Distribution company Limited- (TSSPDbL1,- Cafenoran;g;, Circle. 5iliff T'3X[3J'Bi3l]il,F:fl tSfr f,Bi't'n*#i+gs;Btt)l? l? Hfl Circle 6. The Assistant.. Engineer, Operation,_Katedan, Telangana State -Circte. Power Distribution Company Limited (TSSPDCL), Rajen?
ranagii ... PETITIONERS AND 1. Sri. Anil Kumar, No. E-g, sy. No. 4g, sclc, Kattedan, Rajendranagar, -shed Hyderabad 500 077. 2. Vidyut Ombudsman for the state of Telangana, First Floor 33/11 KV Substation, Beside Hyderabad Boat Clubium6 ini Park, Hyderabad - 500 ... RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court pleased to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the writ of certiorari by calling for the records and to quash the orders 2810612024 in Appeal No. 12 of 2024-25 on the file of the 2nd Respondent arbitrary, illegal unjust and contrary to the law and facts of the case and to quash the same. il 1 2tl petition urder Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in theaffidavitfiledinsupportofthepetition,theHighcourtmaybepleasedtostay the operation of the final orders dated 2Bto6l2o24 in Appeal No. 12 of 2024-25 on the file of the 2ncl ResPondent.
Counsel for the lPetitioners: SRI N. SREEDHAR REDDY, SC FOR TGSPDCL Gounsel for the lRespondent No. 1: Ms'NISHTHA rRespondent No. 2: - -' Counsel for the The Court made the following: ORDER IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT TryDERABAD HON'BLE SMT. RENUKA YARA JUSTICE tt(/ . P. N o. 24522 of 2024 03'd FEBRUARY, 2026 Betvreen: The Superintending Engineer Operation, Rajendranagar, Telangana State Southem Power Distribution C-o mpany Limited, Rajendranagar Circle and five others Petitioners AND Sri Anil Kumar and another Respondents ORDER: Fleard Sri N. Sreedhar Reddy, leamed Standing C-oursel for Telangana State Southern Power Distribution Company Limited appearing for the petitioners and i! 6. Nrshtha, learned counsel appearing for the 1* respondent. 2. Challenging the order dated 28. 06. 2024 passed in Appeal No. 12 of 2024-2025 by the 2"d respondent-Vidyut Ombudsman, the present writ petition is filed. 3.
It is the case of the petitioner-TGSPDCL that the 1', respondent has been provided with a service connection bearing I S. CNc,. 3405 00689 under LT-III Category (industriai) for a contra(:ted load of ru fJP. \7tren the 5,h pedtioner-fusisrant Divisional Engineer inspected the service connection of the L', responJent, he noticed that the 1-'. respcndent has exceeded the contracted load from 74 TD to 108. 367 I*. Wren once rhe contra(ted load exceeds, the billing shall be automatically under HT Gtegory in the energy billi"g sFtem and the bill shall be raised based on FIT tanff . Since the L" respondent has exceeded the co ntracted load, HT bill was raised from 09 . 03. 2024 ro 06. 04. 2024 under HT Category-I. Flence, the L', respondent submitred a representation dated L5. 04. 2024 seeking to revise the bill wit. r LT tariff rarcs. Thereupon, the petitioner- C-ompany uide ')-4. 04.
2024 lener informed the L', respondent that as the contr:acted load was exceeded, the bi[ cannot be revised. Challenging the said HT Bill as well as the lener, the L', responrlent has filed a complaint before the C-onsumer Grievances Redresssal Forum of TGSPDCL (Grearer Hyderabad Area) :;eeking to set aside the claim of excess amounr of Rs. 3,55,165l- pertaining ro the period from 09. 03. 2024 ro i 06. 04. 2r)24 and to issue revised bill with LT tariff ntes. The Forum uide order dated 07. 06. 2024 dismissed the gr"ievance t \ \ 1\ 3 ,i complainr //{ of the L'. respondent. challenging rhe said order dated 07 -06-2024, the 1.. , respondent has approached the 2d respondenr-vidyut ombudsman by fili"g Appeal No. i2 of 2024-25- The 2"d responde nt uide order dated 2g. 06. 2024 allowed the said appeal by sening aside the order dated 07. 06.
2024 passed by the Forum by directing the pedtioners herein ro rernove the HT flag posted for the subject service connection and also to revise the cc bills in respecr of the subject service connecrion for the month of April 2024 as per the clause 10. 12. 10(iv) of Remil supply Tanff order for Fy 2023-24 i. e. , ro bill the excess demand to the exrenr of exceeded RMD over 75 KVA with HT . onff rares and the balance demand shall be billed under LT carcgoryIll onlyand adjust the excess amounr claimed out of Rs. 3,55,165/- along wirh simple interest @ 9o/o p. a. as per clause 2. 49b) of Reguladon No. 3 of 2ol5 within thirry dry.. Flence, the wrir petirion. 4. Learned standing counsel appearing for the petirioners contended that the 2nd respondent-vidyur ombudsman made a differentiation bemeen applicabiliry of tariff under Clause L2. 3. 3 I -!
of c,eneral Terms and c-onditions of supply (GTcs) for Additional connected Loads derecred in LT Services cases and applicabiliry of HT C-ategory-I tariff under Clause 10. 12. 10(iv) of Retail Supply Tariffs and Cross Subsidy Surcharge for the \ffhen Financial Year 2023-24. there is an occasional rise in the connecr-ed load, I-IT- 1 categu\{F would be applicable but nor ibr \ the entire month. 5. Learned Standing Counsel further contended that the 2"d responclent has observed that the Forum has erroneouslyapplied the tari[f on the basis of aforesaid Clause 12. 3. 3, though there were no additional connected loads. The only occurence was occasional rise, above the contracted load, and therefore, tariffs are applicable under the aforesaid Claus e L0. L2. L0(i"). In rhat context. the learned Sanding Counsel placed reliance on the ratio la:d down by the Ap. , C-oun in Centtal Council for Research in Ayurvedic Sciences and another vs. Bikartan Das and otherc. r 6.
L,:arned Smnding C-ounsel conceded that taiff under aforesaiJ Clause 12. 3. 3 is applicable only when additional connect3d loads are derccted, but not for the occasional rise. The FIr-I *rriff is applicable for stray incidents of consumption 'zozslrel scc 462 I f \ i, above the contracted load, but not for the entire period of consumPtron. 7. Learneci counsel for the L', respondent supported the findings given by the 2"d respondent-Vidyut Ombudsman about applicabiliryof the aforesaid Clause 10. 12. 10 (iv) 8. In view of applicabiliry of the aforesaid Clause 12. 3. 3, which is applicable to additional connected load and Clause 10. L2. L0 (iv), which is applicable to occasional consumption of above contracted load, this Court does not see any ground to interfere with the impugned order passed by the 2"d respondent. There are no grounds to entertain the present writ petition. 9. Accordingly, the \7rit Petition is dismissed. No costs.
Miscellaneous petitions, rf any, pending in this petition, shall stand closed. SD/. M. JAWAHAR REDDY AS TANT REGI //TRUE COPY// ECTION OFFICER To, 1. One CC to SRI N. SREEDHAR REDDY, SC FOR DCL, Advocate loPUcl 2. One CC to SRI NISHTHA, Advocate [OPUC] 3. Two CD Copies I PMK @ GJP HIGH COI.. [RT DATED i03,t0212026 E t 6t ? $tt Ir \\[t A1t ORDER * WP. No. 24522 of 2024 DISMISSING THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS L b G,
Source: Supreme Court eSCR. Dataset: Dattam Labs, CC BY 4.0. Text extracted automatically; compare with the source PDF for layout and accuracy.