The Telangana High Court has dismissed a plea by former Chief Minister K Chandrashekhar Rao (KCR) against an inquiry by a commission into alleged irregularities in procuring power from Chhattisgarh by the former Bharat Rashtra Samithi (BRS) led State regime.
The same commission, headed by Justice (retired) L Narasimha Reddy, was also tasked with inquiring into the correctness of setting up two thermal power stations in the State: the Bhadradri Thermal Power Station (BTPS) at Manuguru and Yadadri Thermal Power Station (YTPS) at Damaracherla.
KCR had challenged the validity of the commission on two major grounds:
First, he contended that the commission lacked jurisdiction, as the issue had already been adjudicated by the State Electricity Regulatory Commissions (SERC) of Chhattisgarh and Telangana.
Second, he alleged that the commission was biased, claiming that Justice Narasimha Reddy had pre-judged the issue even before KCR could file his reply.
However, in a ruling passed on July 1, the Bench of Chief Justice Alok Aradhe and Justice Anil Kumar Jukanti upheld the validity of the commission.
The High Court first concluded that the commission had the jurisdiction to conduct the inquiry, noting that its ‘Terms of Reference’ were much broader than the issues adjudicated by the SERCs.
“Therefore, the contention that the Commission does not have jurisdiction to adjudicate the issues which have been decided by the Telangana State Electricity Regulatory Commission and the Chhattisgarh State Electricity Regulatory Commission, which are quasi-judicial bodies, does not deserve acceptance,” the Court said.
The Court proceeded to reject KCR’s allegation of bias against the commission. KCR had referred to certain statements made by Justice Narasimha Reddy in a press conference.
After reviewing an extract from the June 11 press conference, the Court found that KCR had failed to prove bias against the head of the inquiry commission.
“It is evident that the conference was held to update the media about the status of the proceeding before the Commission… The relevant extract does not contain any material so as to indicate that the respondent No.3 (Rtd. Justice Narasimha Reddy) has pre-judged the issues pending before him,” the Court said.
Furthermore, the Court found that the commission, established under the Commissions of Inquiry Act, 1952, was a purely fact-finding body without the authority to make binding judgments.
The Court emphasized that commissions of inquiry are appointed to investigate matters of public importance and that their findings are not enforceable.
It clarified that the commission’s role is to collect facts and submit a report to the appointing authority, which may or may not act on its recommendations.
The Court eventually found that there was no merit in KCR’s petition and dismissed it.
Senior advocate Aditya Sondhi and advocate S Santosh Kumar represented K Chandrashekhar Rao, while Advocate General A Sudershan Reddy represented the State of Telangana.
