Single Judge disposed of a writ petition seeking to quash TANGEDCO orders on deemed demand charges. Relying on a Division Bench interim order, the court directed the petitioner to continue paying 50% of the demand pending the disposal of the writ appeal.
Directed the petitioner to continue paying 50% of the demand made towards deemed demand charges.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 16.12.2021
C O R A M
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KRISHNAN RAMASAMY
W.P.No.30873 of 2018
M/s.JKM Ferrotech Limited, HTSC.1865, No.K4, II Phase, SIPCOT Industrial Complex, Gummidipoondi – 601 201,
Rep.by its Authorised Signatory R.Suresh Kumar. ...Petitioner
Vs
144, Anna Salai, Chennai - 600 002.
144, Anna Salai, Chennai - 600 002.
Prayer Writ Petition filed under Section 226 of the Constitution of India, prayed for the issuance of Writ of Certiorari, seeking to call for the records of the second respondent contained in impugned letter CFC/FC/DFC/AAO.HT/AS.3/REV/D.N.115/13 dated 29.07.2013 and quash the same as arbitrary, illegal and violative of the provisions of the Electricity Act, 2003 and the orders of the TNERC.
For Petitioner : Mr.R.S.Pandiyaraj For Respondents : Mr.L.Jai Venkatesh Standing Counsel for R1 to R3
No appearance for R4
ORDER
This writ petition has been filed aggrieved by the withdrawal of the concession of the deemed demand charges extended to the petitioner by the respondents.
2.This issue was considered by the learned single Judge of this Court and similar impugned orders were quashed by this Court. Aggrieved by the same, the respondents have preferred an appeal and the same is pending in W.A.Nos.2539 & 2540 of 2018.
3.The Division Bench while entertaining the writ appeal directed the concerned parties to pay 50% of the demand made pursuant to the issuance of the impugned order. The relevant portions in the order passed by the Division Bench are extracted hereunder:
"6. This court has carefully considered the rival submissions and also perused the materials placed. In the light of the stand taken by the Tamilnadu Electricity Regulatory Commission in the counter affidavit in paragraph No.14 in W.P.No.28256 of 2014 etc., batch of writ petitions, coupled with the decision of the said Commission, vide the order dated 31.03.2016 in R.A.No.6 of 2013, this Court is of the considered view that prima facie case has been made out for grant of interim orders.
4.In the light of the above order passed by the Division Bench, the petitioner has been paying the 50% deemed demand charges. Hence, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the petitioner to continue to pay 50% of the demand made towards the deemed demand charges till the writ appeal is disposed of by the Division Bench. It is also made clear that the payment made by the petitioner will be subject to the result of the writ appeals and petitioner shall abide by the final orders passed by the Division Bench while disposing of the writ appeals.
5.The writ petition is disposed of accordingly. No Costs.
Sd/Assistant Registrar(CS-CCC)
//True copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
Pns
To:
Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation Limited, (TANGEDCO),
144, Anna Salai, Chennai - 600 002.
Chennai Electricity Distribution Circle/North, TANGEDCO, Chennai.
Tamil Nadu Electricity Regulatory Commission, No.19A, Rukmini Lakshmipathy Salai, Egmore, Chennai – 600 008.
W.P.No.30873 of 2018
GJ(CO) GMY(10/01/2022)
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petition should be disposed of in light of the pending Division Bench appeal regarding deemed demand charges.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
M/s. JKM Ferrotech Limited
Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation Limited
Chief Financial Controller/Revenue, TANGEDCO
Superintending Engineer, Chennai Electricity Distribution Circle/North
Tamil Nadu Electricity Regulatory Commission
KRISHNAN RAMASAMY
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
