Mohammed Yousuf vs. Telangana Southern Power Distribution Company Limited
Facts
The petitioner, Mohammed Yousuf, filed a writ petition challenging a notice dated August 19, 2023, issued by the Assistant Divisional Engineer (Operational), TSSPDCL, Nalgonda. The notice demanded payment of provisionally estimated charges, including GST, for the continuation of power supply to his service connection bearing No. 1111400922. The petitioner sought a declaration that the notice was illegal and arbitrary, and requested the court to direct the respondents (TSSPDCL) to refrain from disconnecting the power supply pending an inquiry. The notice stipulated that if the petitioner had objections, he could make a representation to the Superintending Engineer/Divisional Engineer/Assessments within 15 days. The petitioner, instead of filing a representation, approached the High Court.
Held
The Court observed that the impugned notice clearly provided a mechanism for the petitioner to raise objections by making a representation to the Superintending Engineer/Divisional Engineer/Assessments within 15 days. Instead of availing this statutory remedy, the petitioner directly approached the High Court. Consequently, the Court disposed of the writ petition by directing the petitioner to raise all objections, as stated in the writ petition, before the Superintending Engineer/Divisional Engineer/Assessments within one week of receiving the order. The concerned authority was directed to consider these objections within two weeks thereafter. Additionally, the Court directed the respondents to consider the petitioner's willingness to pay 25% of the provisionally assessed amount for the immediate restoration of the electricity service connection, in accordance with the law.
Key Issues
1. Whether the impugned notice dated August 19, 2023, issued by the Assistant Divisional Engineer (Operational), TSSPDCL, Nalgonda, demanding payment of provisionally estimated charges, including GST, for the continuation of power supply, is illegal, arbitrary, irrational, ultravires, unconstitutional, and violative of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India? Petitioner's Contention: The petitioner argued that the notice was illegal and arbitrary, seeking to disconnect power supply for non-payment of provisionally estimated charges pending an inquiry. The petitioner sought a direction to forebear disconnection until the inquiry was completed. Respondents' Contention: The respondents, represented by TSSPDCL, did not present any specific arguments against the petitioner's claims in the provided text. However, the impugned notice itself outlines a procedure for objections and payment, suggesting a statutory framework for resolving such disputes.
Sections Cited
Section 126
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
132521 HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Juri iction) FRIDAY, THE FIRST DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MRS JUSTICE SUREPALLI NANDA WRIT PETITION NO: 24365 0F 2023 Between: lvl.ohammed Yousuf, S/o. Md Abdul Gaffoor, Aged 46 years, R/o. Flat.No.4S2, Block B, PNT Colonv. Suncity, Bandlaguda, Rajendri fVagar, nanga ReO;-y District. ...PETITIONER AND 1 Telangana Southern Power Distribution Company Limited, Rep. by its General Manager, Mint Compound, Hyderabad. '
Assistant Divisional Enginee(Operationat), TSSpDCL, Nalgonda Rqrat. E.R.O. TSSPDCL, Nalgonda. ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Articre 226 of the constitution of rndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to grant an order, writ or direction more particularly one in nature of Mandamus decraring the impugned notice issued by the 2nd respondent dated 19.08.2023 and threatening to discohnect the power suppty for non_payment of provisionally estimated charges under the impugned notice demanded by the 2nd respondent for continuation of suppry to the service connection. Bearing No.11114oo922 situa
The judgment continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full GST judgments a month (one account works on both bharattax.net and this site). Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
Reproduced from the public record of the Telangana High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.