Disposed

M/s.Srm Civil Works Ltd., v. The Chairman and Managing

Madras HC6 Apr 2017WP/3603/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner filed a writ petition under Article 226 regarding a pending representation for LT Tariff IIIB. The court directed the third respondent to consider the representation and pass appropriate orders on merits within six weeks, subsequently disposing of the petition.

What did the court decide?

Direction issued to the third respondent to consider the representation and pass appropriate orders on merits within six weeks.

M/s.Srm Civil Works Ltd., Vs The Chairman and Managing — Consumer Protection | Madras HC (2017)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 06.04.2017

¶3

CORAM

¶4

The HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M. SUNDRESH

¶5

M/s SRM Civil Works Ltd.,

¶6

Rep. by its Director P. Ravi .. Petitioner vs. 1 The Chairman & Managing Director, Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation Ltd.(TANGEDCO), 144, Anna Salai, Chennai – 600 002. 2 The Chief Financial Controller / Revenue, Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation Ltd.(TANGEDCO), 144, Anna Salai, Chennai – 600 002. 3 The Assistant Electrical Engineer, Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation Ltd.(TANGEDCO), 33/1, 1 Kundrathur Main Road, Kovur, Chennai – 602 101. .. Respondents

¶7

Petition filed under Article 226 of The Constitution of India praying to issue a writ of mandamus directing the Respondents to apply LT Tariff IIIB for the electric connection bearing No.3040221547 given to the Petitioner's factory at Periyapanicheri, Kovur to Paraniputhur Bypass Service Road, Gerugambakkam Post, Kancheepuram District.

¶8

The petitioner made a request to the third respondent on 06.01.2015 to reduce the unit rate for its production unit in line with the order passed by the Tamil Nadu Electricity Regulatory Commission in D.R.P.No.53 of 2014 dated 15.09.2014. As the request is still pending consideration, though two years have elapsed, the present writ petition has been filed.

¶9

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

¶10

2.Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned counsel appearing for the respondents.

¶11

3.Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that considering the long pendency of the representation, the same may be directed to be disposed of by the third respondent by taking note of the order passed by the Tamil Nadu Electricity Regulatory Commission in D.R.P.No.53 of 2014 dated 15.09.2014.

¶12

4.Considering the said submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and taking note of the long pendency of the representation dated 06.01.2015, a direction is issued to the third respondent to consider the said representation and pass appropriate orders on merits and in accordance with law, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The writ petition is disposed of accordingly. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

¶13

Sd/-
Asst.Registrar
/true copy/
Sub Asst. Registrar
mmi
To
1 The Chairman & Managing Director,
Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution
Corporation Ltd.(TANGEDCO),
144, Anna Salai, Chennai – 600 002.
2 The Chief Financial Controller / Revenue,
Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution
Corporation Ltd.(TANGEDCO),
144, Anna Salai, Chennai – 600 002.
3 The Assistant Electrical Engineer,
Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution
Corporation Ltd.(TANGEDCO),
33/1, 1 Kundrathur Main Road,
Kovur, Chennai – 602 101.
+1cc to Mr.S.K. Raameshuwar, Advocate Sr. 20722
+1cc to M/S. Gupta and Ravi, Advocate Sr. 20999
W.P.No.3603 of 2017
NRII(CO)
VR(28/4/2017)

¶14

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

M/s.Srm Civil Works Ltd., v. The Chairman and Managing

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/s.Srm Civil Works Ltd., v. The Chairman and Managing

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Prime Tex Unit-B Vs State of Tamil Nadu

Mrs.D.Zeenath Vs The Managing Director

S.Radhai Vs The District Collector

M/s.Blue Ocean Personnel & Vs The Regional Director

Mrs.a.Meena, Vs The Principal Secretary

R.Deivanai, Vs The District Collector