Telangana HC pulls up discom over inaction on GITAM’s Rs 118-cr power arrears
The Telangana High Court expressed shock over electricity authorities’ failure to disconnect power supply to GITAM University despite Rs 118.13 crore in arrears, while poor consumers face disconnections for minor dues. The Court directed a senior official to appear and explain
Hyderabad: Justice Nagesh Bheemapaka of the Telangana High Court on Tuesday expressed shock over the inaction of electricity authorities against Gandhi Institute of Technology and Management (GITAM) University, despite power dues running into Rs 118.13 crore, while supply to poor consumers is routinely disconnected even for small arrears, often without notice.
The judge questioned the conduct of the officials for merely issuing repeated notices to the university over the years, notwithstanding a clear proposal by the distribution company to disconnect power supply. The arrears, it was pointed out, had accumulated over nearly two decades, beginning from financial year 2008–09.
During the hearing, Justice Bheemapaka recalled a personal instance from his childhood when electricity supply to his home was disconnected for non-payment of dues amounting to Rs 800. Drawing a contrast, the court observed that large institutions with massive outstanding amounts were being spared, raising serious concerns about unequal treatment.
Taking note of the lapse, the court directed Superintending Engineer, Operation Circle, Sangareddy, TGPDCL, to appear in person on the next date of hearing and explain the circumstances under which power supply to the university was not disconnected despite long-pending arrears.
The directions were issued while hearing a writ petition filed by GITAM University challenging notices issued by the power utility for clearance of dues. The matter has been adjourned to December 22 for further hearing.
It was brought to the court’s notice that the Superintending Engineer had issued notices in September 2025 seeking recovery of arrears and proposing disconnection of electricity supply. Challenging the same, counsel for the university argued that the notice was arbitrary, illegal and a colourable exercise of power, issued without proper consideration of relevant facts and in violation of principles of natural justice. It was further contended that the action was contrary to the regulations framed under the Electricity Act.
Opposing the plea, standing counsel for TGPDCL, N Sreedhar Reddy, submitted that the university had earlier approached the High Court in 2020 challenging a similar notice issued in September that year. Though an interim stay was granted initially, the writ petition was later withdrawn. Since then, he said, the dues had mounted substantially, necessitating issuance of a fresh notice in September 2025.
After hearing both sides, the court expressed dismay over the apparent disparity in enforcement, particularly the failure to act against institutions with huge and long-pending dues while promptly disconnecting supply to consumers with minimal arrears.
