THATI BALA KRISHNA Vs. STATE OF TELANGANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) We have heard the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the appellant in these appeals, which is M/s.REC Limited (formerly known as Rural Electrification Corporation Limited). We have also heard the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the respective respondents/writ petitioners, who had instituted the Writ Petitions from which these Writ Appeals arise.

(2.) These intra-Court appeals under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent are against the interlocutory orders issued by the learned single Judge, whereby interim suspension of the further proceedings on the basis of the show cause notice has been issued.

(3.) The learned Senior Counsel for the appellant argued that the foundation of the impugned interlocutory order is wholly unsustainable inasmuch as the Writ Petitions do not contain any challenge to the jurisdiction of the writ appellant to issue the show cause notice. He argues that the jurisdictional facts on the basis of which the power to issue the show cause notice has been exercised is not a matter on which judicial review could be entertained to nip the entire further proceedings in the bud. It is further argued by the learned Senior Counsel for the appellant that there is no question of any bias that could be demonstrated because, fundamentally, in terms of the relevant provisions of the RBI Guidelines, the decision to issue a show cause notice is firstly an institutional decision.