Telangana High Court
M/S Sarvotham Care vs Telangana State Electricity ... on 6 June, 2023
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE MUMMINENI SUDHEER KUMAR
WRIT PETITION No.13739 of 2023
ORDER:
This writ petition is filed seeking a writ of certiorari calling for the records in connection with the order, dated 11.04.2023, passed in O.P.No.61 of 2018 by respondent No.1 - Telangana State Electricity Regulatory Commission (TSERC) to the extent of not granting consequential relief as sought for by the petitioner, consequent upon the findings already recorded in the order, dated 11.04.2023, and for a consequential direction to respondent No.1 to pass appropriate consequential orders in furtherance of the findings already recorded in the order, dated 11.04.2023.
2. Heard Sri Challa Gunaranjan, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Ashvin Kumar, learned Standing Counsel for TSERC appearing for respondent No.1, Sri R. Vinod Reddy, learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondent Nos.2 and 3.
3. It is the contention of learned counsel for the petitioner that the claim of the petitioner was initially allowed by respondent No.1 - TSERC by an order dated, 02.01.2019, 2 granting certain reliefs in favour of the petitioner and the said reliefs granted in favour of the petitioner were also noted at paragraph No.4 of the impugned order. Aggrieved by the said order, dated 02.01.2019, respondent No.3 filed appeals before the Appellate Tribunal for Electricity, New Delhi, viz., Appeal Nos.260 of 2021 and batch and the Appellate Tribunal, by an order, dated 26.05.2022, remanded the matter to respondent No.1 - TSERC with certain directions and required respondent No.1 to decide the matter independently in terms of the directions issued therein and not to be influenced by the order passed by it on an earlier occasion. Pursuant to the said remand order, respondent No.1 - TSERC passed the impugned order, dated 11.04.2023.
4. The grievance of the petitioner in this writ petition is that though respondent No.1 - TSERC decided the matter independently and rendered certain findings, failed to pass consequential orders granting the relief sought for by the petitioner, or otherwise.
5. Sri R. Vinod Reddy, learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondent Nos.2 and 3, strenuously contended that this writ petition is not maintainable under Article 226 of the 3 Constitution of India. He further submitted that if the petitioner is aggrieved by the order passed by respondent No.1 for not granting consequential relief, the petitioner has to avail the remedy of appeal before the Appellate Tribunal or go back to respondent No.1 seeking review of the order, dated 11.04.2023.
6. A perusal of the impugned order shows that there is no mention as to whether the consequential directions/reliefs/ orders sought by the petitioner are allowed or denied by respondent No.1, while passing the order on remand. As is evident from the order, dated 26.05.2022, passed by the Appellate Tribunal, the said matter on remand is required to be decided substantially though scope of adjudication process is limited to the points that were framed by the Appellate Tribunal. Consequently, respondent No.1, after answering the points framed, is required to consider the aspect of passing order consequent upon the findings arrived at by respondent No.1. But, prima facie, it appears that respondent No.1 - TSERC failed to pass such consequential orders in the matter.
7. In the light of the above, this Court is of the considered view that the petitioner has an effective and efficacious remedy of filing review and bringing the aspects that are sought to be 4 agitated before this Court before the very same respondent No.1
- TSERC and if the same is brought to the notice of respondent No.1 - TSERC, respondent No.1 - TSERC would consider the same and pass appropriate consequential orders.
8. In view of the same, the writ petition is disposed of granting liberty to the petitioner to avail the remedy of review under Section 94 (1) (f) of the Electricity Act, 2003 and in case, the review application is filed by the petitioner, respondent No.1
- TSERC shall dispose of the same on merits within a period of two weeks from the date of filing of such review application. There shall be no order as to costs.
Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in this writ petition shall stand closed.
_________________________________ MUMMINENI SUDHEER KUMAR, J Date:06.06.2023 KH 5 THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE MUMMINENI SUDHEER KUMAR WRIT PETITION No.13739 of 2023 Date:06.06.2023 KH