THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI WRIT PETITION No.31701 OF 2025

O R D E R:

This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India seeking the following relief/s:-

“…to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction, more particularly one in the nature of a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, declaring the action of the Respondent No.1 in passing the order dated 16.09.2025 as illegal, arbitrary, violative of the principles of natural justice, and as one suffering from material irregularities and glaring infirmities, consequently, set aside the said order, and further direct the respondents not to insist upon the payment of Rs.41,19,961/- by the petitioner to Respondent No.2, pending disposal of the writ petition, and pass......”

2. Heard Mr.Himanshu Dhawan, learned counsel representing Ms. N.V.R.Rajyalakshmi, learned Counsel representing Mr.N.Bhujanga Rao, learned Deputy Solicitor General of India appearing for respondent No.1.

3.1. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the subject matter of the present petition is already pending adjudication before the Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal (TDSAT), New Delhi. The petitioner has approached this Court being aggrieved by the impugned order passed by the TDSAT in relation to the disputed dues between the petitioner and the respondent.

3.2. It is submitted that the respondent had earlier filed an application before the original jurisdiction of the Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi, wherein both the claim and counter-claim were pending consideration. However, the Tribunal, without entering into the merits of the dispute or undertaking a detailed deliberation, passed an order directing the petitioner to make payment of the claimed amount, failing which the petitioner was directed to personally appear before the Tribunal on 04.11.2025.

3.3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that such a direction, issued at an interlocutory stage, virtually amounts to a pre-determination of liability, which is contrary to the principles of natural justice and prejudicial to the petitioner’s substantive rights. It is further submitted that the petitioner is ready and willing to participate in the proceedings in Broadcasting Petition No.203 of 2024, pending before the TDSAT, and to have the issues relating to the accountal and liability decided on merits. The petitioner, therefore, prays that appropriate directions or observations be issued to safeguard his interest pending adjudication of the main matter.

4. I have perused the material placed on record.

5. A perusal of the impugned miscellaneous order of the TDSAT indicates that the Tribunal has issued two directions: (i) that the petitioner shall make payment of Rs.41,19,961/-

within a period of six weeks; and (ii) that the petitioner shall personally appear before the Tribunal on 04.11.2025.

6. A reading of the order further reflects that the Tribunal has prima facie considered the matter only for the limited purpose of ensuring continuity of service or compliance, and that the direction for payment was issued subject to the petitioner’s admission of liability. The order itself records that, if the petitioner disputes the liability, it would be open to him to appear before the Tribunal and raise all permissible contentions in law.

7. Thus, it is evident that the Tribunal has not conclusively determined the petitioner’s liability but has merely afforded procedural flexibility, permitting the petitioner to either comply with the interim condition or to appear and contest the claim before the Tribunal. The order, therefore, does not amount to a final adjudication or prejudgment of liability.

8. Having regard to the submissions made and the material placed on record, and taking into account the petitioner’s statement that he is willing to participate in the proceedings in Broadcasting Petition No.203 of 2024, this Court is of the considered view that n