Allowed

Orange Valley Windmills P. Ltd. v. Tamilnadu Generation and Distribution

Madras HC26 Oct 2021WP/22695/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court directed TANGEDCO to allow the petitioner to convert an Energy Purchase Agreement to an Energy Wheeling Agreement for group captive consumption and settle pending dues with interest within two months.

What did the court decide?

Directed to permit migration to group captive consumption via Energy Wheeling Agreement and settle dues with interest within two months.

Orange Valley Windmills P. Ltd. Vs Tamilnadu… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 26.10.2021

¶3

CORAM :

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.ANAND VENKATESH

¶5

Writ Petition No.22695 of 2021 and W.M.P.No.23924 of 2021

¶6

Orange Valley Windmills Pvt Ltd WF HTSC No.2151, 4/244/1, Kppatti Kannerimukku Post, Kotagiri-643217 Rep.by its Managing Director, Salim Deen

¶7

... Petitioner

¶8

-Vs-

¶9

1 Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation Ltd (TANGEDCO) 10th

¶10

floor 144 Anna salai chennai-600 002 Rep by its Chairman Cum Managing Director

¶11

2 The Chief Engineer / NCES TANGEDCO, 2nd Floor 144 Anna salai chennai-600002

¶12

3 The Superintending Engineer, TANGEDCO Tirunelveli Electricity Distribution circle Tirunelveli

¶13

4 Tamil Nadu Electricity Regulatory Commission 19-A Rukumini Lakshmipathy salai Egmore Chennai-600008 Rep by its secretary

¶14

…. Respondents

¶15

Prayer : Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the 1st and 2nd and 3rd respondent to allow utility change by terminating the existing Energy Purchase Agreements all dated 15.07.2017 and execute fresh Energy Wheeling Agreement for own Captive Consumption of the energy Generated in petitioners WEG No.2151 and execute fresh Energy Wheeling Agreement under Group Captive Scheme as per the common order of the Honourble High court of Judicature at Madras dated 30.8.2019 which was upheld by the Honourable Division bench dated 18.2.2020 and also by the Honourable Supreme court of India dated 24.9.2020 and

¶16

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

¶17

consequently make payment of Rs.29,28,128/- towards the wind energy sold by the petitioners WEG for the period from August 2019 to till date as per their respectively invoices along with interest at 1 Percentage per month for any delay in payments.

¶18

For Petitioner : Mr.R.S.Pandiyaraj For Respondents : Mr.M.Abul Kalam, Standing Counsel

¶19

O R D E R

¶20

Heard Mr.R.S.Pandiyaraj, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr.Abul Kalam, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents and perused the documents available on record.

¶21

The issue involved in the present writ petition is for a direction against the respondent nos.1, 2 & 3, to convert the existing EPA dated 15.07.2017 executed for the arrangement of Sale of Board, into an EWA for the arrangement of the group captive Consumption of the wind energy of the windmill having WEG No.2151.

¶22

The learned counsel for the writ petitioner submitted that earlier, for the similar prayer, a batch of writ petitions have been filed before this Court in W.P.Nos. 5196, 11725, 8459 & 8463 of 2019 and 6694 & 1275 of 2021. This Court by common order dated 30.08.2019 allowed the writ petitions and granted relief to the petitioners. Challenging the same, the respondent/TANGEDCO preferred an appeal before this Court in W.A.Nos. 4189 of 2019 etc batch and the same was dismissed by the First Bench of this Court by judgment dated 18.02.2020, confirming the order passed in the writ petitions. It was further confirmed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court by order dated 24.09.2020, wherein, the Special Leave Petition filed by TANGEDCO was dismissed, confirming the order passed by this Court in Writ Petitions and Writ Appeal.

¶23

In view of the above, the present writ petition deserves to be allowed with the following directions;

¶24

i. the respondent/TANGEDCO are directed to permit the petitioner to switch over to group captive consumption/third party sale, as the case may be, as per the request made by the petitioner.

¶25

ii.the respondent/TANGEDCO are directed to settle the respective dues to the petitioner as per their

¶26

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

¶27

respective invoices raised by them, along with interest as per Clause 6(b), within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶28

iii.Consequently, in view of permitting the petitioners to migrate from EPA to EWA, the proceedings dated 20.05.2017 issued by the 1st respondent deciding not to concede any request for migration is set aside.

¶29

In fine, with the above directions, the writ petition stands allowed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

¶30

Sd/-

¶31

Assistant Registrar(CS-VII)

¶32

//True Copy//

¶33

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶34

KST

¶35

¶36

1 The Chairman and Managing Director

¶37

Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation Ltd (TANGEDCO) 10th floor 144 Anna salai chennai-600 002.

¶38

2 The Chief Engineer

¶39

NCES, TANGEDCO

¶40

2nd Floor 144 Anna salai Chennai-600002

¶41

3 The Superintending Engineer, TANGEDCO Tirunelveli Electricity Distribution circle Tirunelveli

¶42

4 The Secretary, Tamil Nadu Electricity Regulatory Commission 19-A Rukumini Lakshmipathy salai Egmore Chennai-600008 Rep by its secretary

¶43

+1cc to Mr.R.S.Pandiyaraj, Advocate, S.R.No.54917

¶44

W.P.No.22695 of 2021

¶45

GPL(CO) SU(15/11/2021)

¶46

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

Orange Valley Windmills P. Ltd. v. Tamilnadu Generation and Distribution

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Orange Valley Windmills P. Ltd. v. Tamilnadu Generation and Distribution

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

Arkay Energy(Rameswaram) Limited Vs Pankaj Kumar Bansal

K.Mariyappan Vs Sumathi

Vijayakumar Vs The Principal Secretary

M.Parameswari Vs The commissioner

R.S.Ganesh Vs The Registrar of Co-operative Societies (Housing)

Sumangala Steel Private Ltd., Vs Superintendent Engineer-I