Disposed

Sree Rengaraaj Ispat v. Tamil Nadu Generation and

Madras HC20 Apr 2016WP/10262/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court directed the Superintending Engineer, TANGEDCO Erode, to consider the Petitioner's representation dated 04.01.2016 along with other submissions regarding unauthorized collection of recurring maintenance charges. The Court ordered a personal hearing to the Petitioner and passed appropriate orders on merits within four weeks. The writ petition was disposed of on interim terms pending

What did the court decide?

Direction to the Superintending Engineer, TANGEDCO Erode, to consider the Petitioner's representation of 04.01.2016 after a personal hearing and to pass appropriate orders within four weeks.

Sree Rengaraaj Ispat Vs Tamil Nadu Generation and — Banking and Recovery | Madras HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED :: 20.04.2016

¶3

CORAM ::

¶4

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.S. SIVAGNANAM WRIT PETITION NO: 10262 OF 2016

¶5

Sree Rengaraaj Ispat Industries Pvt. Ltd. (HTSCNo.379) 99, Sankagiri Main Road Nethimedu Salem – 636 002 rep by its General manager E. Murugan .. Petitioner -vs1. Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation Ltd. rep by its Chairman No: 144 Anna Salai Chennai – 600 002.

¶6

The Director – Operations Tamil Nadu Transmission Corporations ( TANTRANSCO ) 144 Anna Salai Chennai – 600 002.

¶7

The Superintending Engineer Load Despatch and Grid Operation Tamil Nadu Transmission Corporations ( TANTRANSCO ) 144 Anna Salai Chennai – 600 002. 4. The Superintending Engineer TANGEDCO Erode Electricity Distribution Circle Erode – 638 009. 5. The Accounts Officer / Revenue TANGEDCO Erode Electricity Distribution Circle Erode – 638 009. ... Respondents

¶8

Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a writ of certiorarified mandamus calling for the records of the 5^th respondent's impugned CC bills dated https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 29.02.2016 insofar as it relates to the levy of “recurring maintenance charges'' to a tune of Rs. 1,65,060/- in Serial No: 21

¶9

'other adjustment', quash the same as illegal, arbitrary, without the authority of law and against the provisions of the Electricity Act 2003 and consequently forbear the 4^th and 5^th respondent from demanding / collecting ''recurring maintenance charges'' from the petitioner until the respondents clafies the approval from the competent authority to collect such charges and direct the 4^th respondent to give refund / adjustment of the entire amount of Rs.86,03,881/- so far unauthorizedly collected from the petitioner from February, 2012 onwards.

¶10

For petitioner :: Mr. S. P. Parthasarathy

¶11

For respondents :: Mr. S. K. Rameshwar

¶12

Petitioner is a coal b ased power plant with a capacity of 30MW and they sought for issuance of a writ of certiorarified mandamus calling for the records of the 5^th respondent's impugned CC bills dated 29.02.2016 insofar as it relates to the levy of “recurring maintenance charges'' to a tune of Rs. 1,65,060/- in Serial No: 21 'other adjustment', quash the same as illegal, arbitrary, without the authority of law and against the provisions of the Electricity Act 2003 and consequently forbear the 4^th and 5^th respondent from demanding / collecting ''recurring maintenance charges'' from the petitioner until the respondents clafies the approval from the competent authority to collect such charges and direct the 4^th respondent to give refund / adjustment of the entire amount of Rs.86,03,881/- so far unauthorizedly collected from the petitioner from February, 2012 onwards.

¶13

At the time when this writ petition was entertained, Mr.S.K.Raameshwar learned standing counsel accepted notice and sought time. Today, when the matte is taken up the learned counsel appearing for the respondents seeks further time to get instructions. Faced with that situation, the learned counsel appearing for the writ petitioner, on instructions, submit that the petitioner would be satisfied if a direction is issued to the Superintending Engineer, Erode Electricity Distribution Circle, Erode, the 4^th respondent herein, to consider petitioner's representation dated 04.01.2016, though the petitioner has given several representations on various dates to the said authority continuously. The typed set of papers filed along with the writ petition shows that on all occasions, the petitioner has paid the “Recurring Maintenance Charges” under protest and submitted his objections on 28.01.2012, 02.11.2012, 28.11.2012, 21.05.2013, 10.10.2013, 25.02.2014, 05.03.2014, 04.09.2014, 19.12.2014, 19.01.2015, 19.02.2015, 23.03.2015, 20.04.2015, 20.05.2015, 19.06.2015, 20.07.2015, 04.08.2015, 19.09.2015, 12.10.2015, 19.11.2015, 19.12.2015 and 04.01.2016.

¶14

Though all these representations have been received by the 4^th respondent till date no action has been initiated and no https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ orders have been passed by the respondents. It is note worthy to point out at this juncture that the 3^rd respondent, by his letter

¶15

dated 05.09.2012, has addressed the 4^th respondent requesting him to clarify whether the O & M Charges and rental charges have been approved by the competent authority vide their letter dated 25.07.2013 and that the information sought for has not yet been received by the 3^rd respondent from the 4^th respondent. However, even this direction of the 3^rd respondent has not evoked any response.

¶16

In the light of the above, there will be a direction to the 4^th respondent to consider petitioner's representation dated 04.01.2016 after affording an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner and consider its submissions and pass appropriate orders on merits in accordance with law within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The writ petition stands disposed of in the above terms. Connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. There shall be no orders as to the costs.

¶17

Sd/-
Asst.Registrar (CO)
/true copy/
Sub Asst. Registrar
gp
To
1. The Chairman
Tamil Nadu Generation and
Distribution Corporation Ltd.
No: 144 Anna Salai
Chennai – 600 002.
2. The Director – Operations
Tamil Nadu Transmission Corporations
( TANTRANSCO )
144 Anna Salai
Chennai – 600 002.
3. The Superintending Engineer
Load Despatch and Grid Operation
Tamil Nadu Transmission Corporations
( TANTRANSCO )
144 Anna Salai
Chennai – 600 002.
4. The Superintending Engineer
TANGEDCO
Erode Electricity Distribution Circle
Erode – 638 009.

¶18

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶19

The Accounts Officer / Revenue TANGEDCO Erode Electricity Distribution Circle Erode – 638 009.

¶20

1 cc to Mr.R.S. Pandiyaraj, Advocate, Sr. 24609

¶21

1 cc to Mr.S.K. Raameshuwar, Advocate, Sr. 24812

¶22

W.P. No: 10262 of 2016

¶23

PVS (CO) kk 5/5

¶24

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

Sree Rengaraaj Ispat v. Tamil Nadu Generation and

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sree Rengaraaj Ispat v. Tamil Nadu Generation and

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

P.Anbuchezian, Vs The Inspector of Labour

L.Balakrishnan Vs The Chief Engineer

M. Alphones Vs The District Collector

The Management of Coramandel Vs the Presiding Officer

Iyyamperumal Vs the Principal Commr.& Commr.

T.M.Kannaiah Naidu Vs The Member Secretary