Live
- They always want me to win, and now I feel lucky to have been offered a story like ‘Zebra’: Satyadev Kancharana
- ‘Democracy first, humanity first’: PM Modi in Guyana's parliament on two countries' similarities
- PKL Season 11: Telugu Titans register third straight win to top standings
- Is Pollution Contributing to Your COPD?
- NASA Unveils Underwater Robots for Exploring Jupiter's Moons
- Additional Central forces arrive in violence-hit Manipur
- AR Rahman and Saira Banu’s Divorce: Legal Insights into Common Issues in Bollywood Marriages
- 82.7 pc work completed in HPCL Rajasthan Refinery area: official
- Curfew relaxation extended in 5 Manipur districts on Friday
- Tab scam prompts Bengal govt to adopt caution over fund disbursement
Writ by KCR seeking stay on one-man commission probe into power procurement by BRS govt
The Telangana High Court’s division bench, comprising Chief Justice Alok Aradhe and Justice Jukanti Anil Kumar, adjudicated the writ petition filed by K Chandrashekar Rao, former CM, seeking a stay GO 9 of the Energy [Power.II] department dated March 14, 2024 constituting the One Man Commission headed by former Justice L Narasimha Reddy to inquire into procurement of power from Chattisgarh by TS Discoms and construction of the Bhadradri Thermal Power Plant at Manuguru and Yadadri Thermal Plant at Damacherla.
Hyderabad : The Telangana High Court’s division bench, comprising Chief Justice Alok Aradhe and Justice Jukanti Anil Kumar, adjudicated the writ petition filed by K Chandrashekar Rao, former CM, seeking a stay GO 9 of the Energy [Power.II] department dated March 14, 2024 constituting the One Man Commission headed by former Justice L Narasimha Reddy to inquire into procurement of power from Chattisgarh by TS Discoms and construction of the Bhadradri Thermal Power Plant at Manuguru and Yadadri Thermal Plant at Damacherla.
The petition was listed before the bench at scrutiny stage as the registry had objected to the impleading of Justice Reddy, who is heading the commission in “personal capacity” in the writ. Aditya Sondi, senior counsel, clarified the objections and informed the court that the justice before conducting inquiry and before giving an opportunity to KCR to put forth his contentions before the commission on questions posed by it has come to a conclusion that the KCR government had committed irregularities due to which the State exchequer was at a loss of 250-300 crore, which is a biased decision, hence, Reddy has been impleaded in personal capacity.
Sondhi, KCR’s counsel, informed the court that the Power Purchase Agreements(PPAs) between Telangana and Chhattisgarh were approved by the Electricity Regulatory Commission of both governments. Rather, the ERCs have already ratified the decision of the government. When such is the situation, how come the chairman of the commission at a press conference on June 11 brief the press and media stating that the KCR government had purchased power from Chattisgarh on nomination basis; rather did not follow any procedure, while purchasing power is incorrect, biased and pre-judged contention.
Though, the commission gave time to KCR till June 15 to appear before it and furnish his reply, but prior to this Reddy convened a press conference. The counsel informed the bench that the commission chairman had already come to a conclusion; this opinion of the chairman will reflect in his final report; there will be nothing left later to give a report as all details pertaining to inquiry have been divulged to the media. Hence he sought a direction to the commission that its final report should not be submitted without the court’s consent.
The information given to the press by Justice Reddy is a stigma on KCR’s character and conduct, which will haunt him for life. This will tarnish KCR’s image further, contended the counsel. The duty of the commission is to give its recommendations which are not enforceable, whereas in this case, the chairman has given a finding, before giving an opportunity to the petitioner to put forth his contention.
The counsel said notices issued to KCR U/s. 8 of the Commission of Enquiry elucidating the alleged lapses and mistakes done by his government, while purchasing power from Chattisgarh, which itself shows that Reddy had already arrived at a predetermined conclusion of the inquiry.
Hearing in the case was adjourned to Friday on admission of the writ.
Writs seeking direction to Speaker to disqualify BRS MLAs defecting to Cong adjourned to July 3 for further arguments.
On Thursday Aryama Sundaram, senior SC counsel, appeared for petitioners Kuna Pandu Vivekananda and Padi Kaushik Reddy, MLAs (BRS), seeking a direction to the Assembly Speaker, to disqualify BRS MLAs Venkata Rao Tellam, (Bhadradri Koghagudem) and Kadiam Srihari (Ghanpur) and Danam Nagender (Khairatabad) for “defecting” to the Congress without resigning from BRS.
Two judgments delivered by the SC in Maharashtra and Manipur cases, wherein the it had directed the respective Speakers to decide the disqualification petitions pending before them within a prescribed time limit. The judgments were placed before Justice B Vijaysen Reddy and sought a direction to the Speaker to decide on the disqualification petitions pending before him.
Due to paucity of time the judge adjourned the petitions to July 3 for further hearing.
The judge was adjudicating the petition filed by Vivekananda seeking a direction to the Speaker to take action on the disqualification petitions, which were sent by the petitioner to the Speaker on April 10 via registered post and email seeking disqualification of Venkata Rao and Srihari.
The judge also dealt with the WP.9472 of 2024 filed by Kaushik Reddy seeking a direction to the Speaker to disqualify Nagender for switching to the Congress.
