Allowed

Mu.Thamizharasan v. the Superintending Engineer

Madras HC15 Mar 2021WP/7197/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner challenged the collection of excess electricity charges and a security deposit based on defective meter readings. The Court allowed the writ petition, directing a refund of the excess amount and forbearing further deposit collection.

What did the court decide?

Directed refund of Rs.13,679 collected due to defective meter and forbearance from collecting further deposit.

Mu.Thamizharasan Vs the Superintending Engineer — Service and Employment | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED: 15.03.2021

¶3

CORAM:

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.SARAVANAN

¶5

W.P.No.7197 of 2014 and W.M.P.No.1 of 2014

¶6

Mu.Thamizharasan ... Petitioner
Vs.
1.The Superintending Engineer,
TamilNadu Electricity Board,
Anna Salai, Chennai – 600 002.
2.The Executive Engineer, T.N.E.B,
O & M, Vyserpadi,
110/33, K.V.S.S.Complex,
(Basin Bridge), Vysarpadi,
Chennai – 600 039.
3.The Assistant Account Officer,
Tamilnadu Electricity Board,
Vysarpadi Division, Vysarpadi,
Chennai – 600 039.
4.The Assistant Divisional Engineer,
Tamilnadu Electricity Board,
Vysarpadi Division, Vysarpadi,
Chennai – 600 039.
5.The Assistant Engineer,
Tamilnadu Electricity Board,
M.K.B.Nagar Division,
Vysarpadi, Chennai – 600 039. ... Respondents

¶7

PRAYER:- Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of Writ of Mandamus, to direct the respondents to refund the sum of Rs.13,679/- illegally collected from the petitioner together with interest at the rate of 12% per annum from date of payment of the said amount i.e 25.09.2013 and forbear the respondents from insisting the deposit of the sum of Rs.7,630/- towards ACCO in respect of service connection No,070:038:113 in premises No.66/23, III Palla Street, Vysarpadi, Chennai – 600 039.

¶8

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

¶9

For Petitioner : Mr.Raja Ravivarma For Respondents : Mr.P.R.Dhilipkumar

¶10

O R D E R

¶11

The petitioner has filed this writ petition to direct the respondent to refund the amount of Rs.13,679/- collected for the petitioner for the period between June and July 2012 based on the defective metre reading. The petitioner has also prayed for an order forbearing direct the respondent from collecting a deposit of Rs.7,630/-.

¶12

2.There is no counter on behalf of the respondent. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent submits that the petitioner has an alternate remedy under the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Electricity Supply Code read with Electricity Act, 2003. It was however orally submitted that the petitioner had purchased the property in the year 2002 and was occupied by a tenant who had certain electrical items installed and used and therefore there was justification in collecting excess amount.

¶13

3.However, there is no dispute that based on the complaint of the petitioner, a new metre was subsequently installed on 27.09.2013 and the consumption has drastically come down to 178 units as against 2010 units recorded for the month of June and July, 2012 under the old defective metre.

¶14

4.Thus, the collection of excess amount of Rs.13,679/from the petitioner and the consequential demand for deposit cannot be justified. In this circumstances, I am inclined to allow this writ petition by forbearing the respondent from collecting any further amount towards deposits based on the defective metre. I also direct the respondents to adjust the aforesaid amount of RS.13,679/- collected from the petitioner on 23.09.2013 against future compensation and square up the excess collection.

¶15

5.Writ Petition stands disposed with the above observation. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.

Sd/-

Assistant Registrar

//True Copy//

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶20

jas

¶21

¶22

1.The Superintending Engineer, TamilNadu Electricity Board, Anna Salai, Chennai – 600 002. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶23

2.The Executive Engineer, T.N.E.B,
O & M, Vyserpadi,
110/33, K.V.S.S.Complex,
(Basin Bridge), Vysarpadi,
Chennai – 600 039.
3.The Assistant Account Officer,
Tamilnadu Electricity Board,
Vysarpadi Division, Vysarpadi,
Chennai – 600 039.
4.The Assistant Divisional Engineer,
Tamilnadu Electricity Board,
Vysarpadi Division, Vysarpadi,
Chennai – 600 039.
5.The Assistant Engineer,
Tamilnadu Electricity Board,
M.K.B.Nagar Division,
Vysarpadi, Chennai – 600 039.
+1cc to Mr.M.Sathish Kumar, Advocate, S.R.No. 16686
W.P.No.7197 of 2014
and
W.M.P.No.1 of 2014
GSM(CO)
GN(16/06/2021)

¶24

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

Mu.Thamizharasan v. the Superintending Engineer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mu.Thamizharasan v. the Superintending Engineer

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

Abhishek Mundhra Vs Yamuna Devi

G.Raniammal Vs Chennai Metropolitan

S.Jothimani Vs the Junior Engineer

B.Saraladevi Vs The Government of Tamil Nadu

K.S.Deeparani, Vs Salem Corporation

Shanthi Vs The Chairman