Allowed

Gangotri Textiles Ltd, UNIT-1, v. Tamilnadu Electricity

Madras HC16 Feb 2022WP/24998/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This single-judge order disposes of a writ petition seeking quashing of an electricity bill and refund of excess charges levied by the Superintending Engineer. Citing a similar decision by the Appellate Tribunal for Electricity, the court quashed the impugned bill, directing that the refund be adjusted in future consumption charges, and disposed of the petition.

What did the court decide?

Quashed of Bill No.122 dated 01.08.2010 for Rs.6,39,558.67; refund to be adjusted in future consumption charges.

Gangotri Textiles Ltd, UNIT-1, Vs Tamilnadu Electricity — Banking and Recovery | Madras HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 16.02.2022

¶3

CORAM :

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.GOVINDARAJ Writ Petition No.24998 of 2010 & M.P.No.1 of 2010

¶5

Gangotri Textiles Limited Unit-1, HT SC No.122 473/2, P.K.D.Nagar near Dr.Rajagopal Hospital Peelamedu, Coimbatore District rep. by its Managing Director Manoj Kumar Tibrewal ... Petitioner

¶6

-Vs-

¶7

Tamil Nadu Electricity Regulatory Commission rep by its Secretary 19-A, Rukmini Lakshmipathy Salai (Marshall's road)

¶8

Egmore, Chennai-600 008

¶9

The Chairman Tamil Nadu Electricity Board 144, Anna Salai, Chennai-600 002

¶10

The Superintending Engineer Coimbatore Elec. Distri. Circle (south) Tamil Nadu Electricity Board Coimbatore ... Respondents

¶11

Prayer: Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records of the 3^rd respondent in his Bill No.122 dated 01.08.2010 for 6,39,558.67 quash the same in so far as it relates to the levy of excess charges/penalty for alleged excess demand and energy quota as illegal, arbitrary without the authority of law and against the orders of the 1^st respondent made in suo motu proceedings No.1 of 2009 dated 28.10.2009 and consequently direct the 3^rd respondent to refund the above amount.

¶12

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

¶13

For Petitioner : Mr.R.S.Pandiyaraj

¶14

For Respondents : Mr.Abdul Kalam

¶15

O R D E R

¶16

The Writ petition has been filed, praying for the issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to for the records of the 3^rd respondent in his Bill No.122 dated 01.08.2010 for 6,39,558.67 quash the same in so far as it relates to the levy of excess charges/penalty for alleged excess demand and energy quota as illegal, arbitrary without the authority of law and against the orders of the 1^st respondent made in suo motu proceedings No.1 of 2009 dated 28.10.2009 and consequently direct the 3^rd respondent to refund the above amount.

¶17

The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner mill is involved in the manufacture of yarn having High Tension Electricity supply in H.T.Sc.No.122 (CEDC-SOUTH). The Government of Tamilnadu through electricity department have restricted the consumption of power on 22.10.2008. Based on the direction of the Government, the 2^nd respondent imposed 40% power cut to H.T. Industrial and commercial consumers. Subsequently, the 3^rd respondent used to revise the quota from time to time depending upon the availability of power and the petitioner has been limiting their consumption with the quota fixed. The petitioner has never violated the quota fixed by the 3^rd respondent. While so, the 3^rd respondent has issued the impugned bill dated 01.08.2010 for a sum of Rs.6,39,558.67 towards levy of excess charges/penalty for alleged excess demand and energy charges for the period July 2010.

¶18

The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that, initially, the petitioner was allowed to consume 80% of energy and subsequently, the 3^rd respondent revised the quota periodically. The petitioner has never exceeded the limit fixed by the 3^rd respondent and the petitioner has paid electricity consumption charges without any default. But, the 3^rd respondent vide demand notice dated 01.08.2010, demanding the petitioner a sum of Rs.6,39,558.67 towards incorrect fixation of excess demand and energy charges for the period July 2010, for the alleged excess consumption of energy. The 3^rd respondent without providing any opportunity to the petitioner, has straight away issued the impugned demand notice dated 01.08.2010.

¶19

The learned counsel for the petitioner would further submit that the similar issue has already decided by the Appellate Tribunal for Electricity confirming the order of the Tamilnadu Electricity Regulatory Commission that the respondents cannot claim for a demand when the consumer abided the quota

¶20

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

¶21

fixed by the TANGECO as advance declaration. He has also produced the judgment of Appellate Tribunal for Electricity in Appeal No.117 of 2013 and prayed to allow the Writ Petition.

¶22

The learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents 1 to 3 submitted that the respondent Board will follow the order passed by the Appellate Tribunal for Electricity, for this petitioner also.

¶23

In view of the fact that, the similar issue has already been decided by the Appellate Tribunal for Electricity, the impugned Bill No.122 dated 01.08.2010 for Rs.6,39,558.67 is quashed. With regard to the refund, the same may be adjusted in the future consumption charges. With the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

¶24

Sd/-

¶25

Assistant Registrar(CS-IV)

¶26

//True copy//

¶27

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶28

sha

¶29

¶30

The Secretary Tamil Nadu Electricity Regulatory Commission 19-A, Rukmini Lakshmipathy Salai (Marshall's road)

¶31

Egmore, Chennai-600 008

¶32

The Chairman

¶33

Tamil Nadu Electricity Board 144, Anna Salai, Chennai-600 002

¶34

The Superintending Engineer Coimbatore Elec. Distri. Circle (south) Tamil Nadu Electricity Board Coimbatore

¶35

+1cc to Mr.R.S.Pandiyaraj, Advocate SR.No.10159

¶36

Writ Petition No.24998 of 2010 & M.P.No.1 of 2010

¶37

CA(CO) GMY(20/06/2022)

¶38

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

Gangotri Textiles Ltd, UNIT-1, v. Tamilnadu Electricity

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gangotri Textiles Ltd, UNIT-1, v. Tamilnadu Electricity

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

S.Ramasamy Vs the State of Tamilnadu

T.v.Hari Prasad Vs The Directorate of Medical

Kancheepuram District Vs the State of Tamil Nadu

S.Sivapatham Vs The Assistant Executive

K.Masilamani Vs the Executive Engineer

Devi Polymers Private Ltd., Vs Tamilnadu Electricity