Telangana High Court Pulls Up State Govt Over Delayed Payments to Contractors

Hyderabad:The Telangana High Court has expressed serious concern over the inordinate delay in clearing payments to private agencies that executed government projects, observing that such delays could push contractors into a financial crisis and affect their ability to pay their employees. Justice T. Madhavi Devi questioned how private agencies could survive when payments for completed works were delayed indefinitely.

The judge was dealing with a contempt petition filed by Hyderabad-based infrastructure firm NCC Limited. The company alleged that the state government had failed to clear its pending bills worth Rs 198 crore for works executed under the Mission Bhagiratha scheme. The works pertained to providing drinking water to Chevella, Vikarabad, Parigi, Tandur and Maheswaram constituencies from the Srisailam reservoir under the Telangana Drinking Water Supply Project, including operation and maintenance for 10 years.

The court faulted finance secretary Sandeep Kumar Sultania for failing to comply with the court’s earlier orders and for not appearing before the court despite directions to do so. The court gave the finance department a final opportunity to clear the dues of NCC and file a compliance report by March 13. It directed that Sultania should continue to appear before the court until the payment was completed if the dues were not cleared within the stipulated time.

While dealing with another contempt case on a similar issue for not clearing pending bills to the suppliers of the fish seed, the judge directed the authorities to pay the amount by March 9, otherwise the finance department authorities would have to appear before the court.

Telangana High Court Issues Notices to CBI, State Govt Over Indiramma Housing Scam in Mulugu

Hyderabad:The Telangana High Court has issued notices to authorities, including the CBI, over allegations of large-scale irregularities in the implementation of the Indiramma housing scheme in Mulugu district.

A division bench comprising Justice P. Sam Koshy and Justice Narsing Rao Nandikonda directed the Chief Secretary, the principal secretary, housing, the Mulugu district collector, director of the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), and the secretary, Venkatapuram gram panchayat, to file their responses within three weeks.

The Bench was dealing with a taken-up public interest litigation (PIL) that originated from a letter addressed to the Chief Justice by Thippala Sai Bhavani, a resident of Mulugu district. The court converted the letter into a PIL to examine the allegations.

In her complaint, Sai Bhavani alleged large-scale corruption in the allotment of houses under the Indiramma housing scheme, a welfare programme launched by the state government to provide housing for economically weaker sections. The petitioner alleged that instead of conducting a verification process to identify beneficiaries, officials carried out a fake and fabricated survey. According to her, houses under the scheme were allegedly allotted to individuals who paid bribes ranging between `50,000 and `1 lakh.

She claimed that the amounts collected from beneficiaries were being circulated as micro-finance loans at exorbitant interest rates by some officials at the mandal and village levels.

Telangana HC: Power Utilities Can Disconnect Supply at Alternate Premises for Unpaid Dues

Hyderabad:The Telangana High Court has made it clear that the power utilities were empowered by the Electricity Supply Act to disconnect supply to consumers who have another service connection, for non-payment of electricity bills due on a different connection. Justice Nagesh Bheemakapaka dismissed a writ petition filed by Sri Abhishek Rs 1.27 crore.

According to the TSSPDCL notice, Sri Abhishek Steels, formerly known as Abhishek Steels Limited, owed Rs 1,27,54,218, including delayed payment surcharge calculated up to June 20, 2023. The notice warned that electricity supply to Flat No. 104, Vijaya Enclave, Srinagar Colony, Panjagutta, Hyderabad, associated with the petitioner, would be disconnected if the dues were not cleared.

However, the dues belonged to the another property at Gundla Pochampally of Medchal mandal of erstwhile Rangareddy district.

According to the petitioner, the company had been classified as a defaulter and the Asset Reconstruction Company (India) Limited (ARCIL) had possession of the company’s industrial property located at Gundla Pochampally. ARCIL had conducted a public auction of the property on September 22, 2017, and the premises were purchased by Pragathi Leasing and Developers on an “as is where is and as is what is” basis.

The purchaser approached the High Court seeking a fresh electricity connection after the power distribution company refused to provide supply due to the outstanding dues of the previous owner. In that case, the court had directed the authorities to provide a new connection without insisting on payment of the earlier dues.

Subsequently, the electricity department traced the address of the petitioner’s authorised representative and issued a demand notice seeking recovery of the outstanding electricity charges of nearly `1.27 crore, which included current consumption dues of `44,51,734 and a delayed payment surcharge of `83,02,484.

The petitioner contended that the electricity authorities could not threaten them with disconnection of power supply to a different premises for dues related to the industrial unit that had been sold in auction. It was also argued that the respondents had initiated recovery proceedings under the relevant rules and therefore issuing another notice was arbitrary.

N. Sreedhar Reddy, counsel for the power distribution company, argued that the dues were incurred while the petitioner was the consumer and that the liability remained with the original owner despite the auction of the property. After examining the material on record, the court observed that the recovery process had been initiated even before the auction of the property and that the petitioner could not avoid liability for the arrears by relying on the sale of the premises on an “as is where is” basis.

The court also noted that the applicable regulations empowered the electricity authorities to disconnect supply to another service connection of the same consumer when dues remain unpaid.

Justice Bheemapaka also dismissed another petition filed by Sri Abhishek Steels seeking restoration of nearly three acres of land in Medchal district from TSSPDCL and others

The company had approached the court alleging that the TSSPDCL had been illegally occupying land located in Survey No.s 131, 131/2, 131/3 and 131/4 at Kandla Koi in Medchal mandal since 1991. It sought directions to restore possession of the land and pay compensation, contending that the property had been handed over for establishing a 132/33 KV sub-station to erstwhile AP State Electricity Board, based on a promise to provide electricity through a dedicated feeder line to its steel plant at Gundla Pochampally.

Opposing the plea, TSSPCDL counsel Sridhar Reddy submitted that the petitioner had issued a consent letter in 1988 handing over the land free of cost and acknowledging the electricity board as the full owner for the purpose of constructing the sub-station.

The court noted that the consent letter barred the petitioner and its successors from reclaiming the land. It held that the issues raised in the case essentially related to private law remedies, which could not be adjudicated in writ jurisdiction under Article 226.