The Telangana High Court dismissed a writ petition, filed by M/s GVK Gautami Power Limited nearly nine years ago seeking reimbursement of ₹24.28 crore from power distribution companies of Andhra Pradesh and Telangana, with costs of one lakh rupees. 

Justice Nagesh Bheemapaka of the High Court, delivering the verdict, said that the plea lacked territorial jurisdiction. He also observed that execution of an order passed by a sub-ordinate tribunal (in this case an order issued in 2013 by AP Electricity Regulatory Commission) cannot be ordered in proceedings under writ jurisdiction. The costs imposed should be paid to the respondents in the case. 

The court did not agree with the petitioner company’s contention that power distribution companies cannot seek dismissal of its plea since it was pending for past nine years. The judge said the court was “awestruck to note that the power distribution companies (respondents) did not make any claim of the amount before the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) where the petitioner company’s  proceedings under Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) are pending. 

They did not even make an application before the Insolvency Resolution Professional regarding their claim which was pending before the Central Electricity Regulatory Commission, the judge said. The judge instructed the officials of the TRANSCO departments of both the States and all the DISCOMS to probe into the matter to ascertain who was responsible for not making the claim which resulted in loss to public ex-chequer. 

The petitioner company, which was into the business of generation and sale of electrical energy, entered into a Power Purchase Agreement (PPA) in 1997 with the then AP Electricity Board which eventually got divided into different TRANSCO companies following bifurcation of the State.

According to the petitioner, the power distribution companies of the two States were bound to reimburse all taxes levied on its income including the Minimum Alternate Tax (MAT) paid by it to the Income Tax department. 

The petitioner company’s power project was located in Peddapuram of Kakinada district in AP, coming under territorial jurisdiction of the AP High Court. The PPA was also made with the authorities operating in and from AP. All transactions and the cause of action was from the AP. The plea of the company was about an order passed by the APERC. “Hence, it is to be held that this Court does not have territorial jurisdiction to entertain the writ petition,” the verdict said.