Disposed

M/S.Indus Towers Ltd., v. the Executive Engineer

Madras HC17 Mar 2022WP/31195/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court disposed of a writ petition seeking restoration of electricity service. It observed the petitioner was ready to pay reasonable charges but were denied opportunity. The Court directed the respondent to provide an opportunity to the petitioner and pass fresh orders, noting the connection was already restored.

What did the court decide?

3rd respondent directed to provide opportunity to petitioner and pass orders afresh considering the service connection was already restored; no costs awarded.

M/S.Indus Towers Ltd., Vs the Executive Engineer — Consumer Protection | Madras HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED :17.03.2022

¶3

CORAM:

¶4

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE K.KALYANASUNDARAM

¶5

W.P.No.31195 of 2013 and M.P.No.1 of 2013

¶6

M/s.INDUS TOWERS LTD, Represented by its Manager - Legal, NP5, Jawaharlal Nehru Road, ESPEE IT Park, 5th Floor, Ekkattuthangal, Chennai 600032. ...Petitioner Vs.

¶7

The Executive Engineer, (Operation and Maintenance), Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation Ltd., (TANGEDCO Limited), Tambaram, Chennai 600045.

¶8

The Assistant Executive Engineer, (Operation and Maintenance), Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation Ltd., (TANGEDCO Limited), Chennai Electricity Distribution Circle, Chennai South, Keezhkatalai, Chennai 600045.

¶9

The Assistant Engineer, (Operation and Maintenance), Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation Ltd., (TANGEDCO Limited), Chennai Electricity Distribution Circle, Chennai South, Keezhkatalai, Chennai 600045.

¶10

The Assistant Engineer, (Operation and Maintenance), Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation Ltd., (TANGEDCO Limited), Chennai Electricity Distribution Circle, Chennai South, Kovilambakkam, Chennai. ...Respondents

¶11

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

¶12

Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents herein to immediately restore electricity to the petitioner at No.404, 200 Feet Road, Echangadu, Kovilambakkam, Chennai, in S.C.No.09316008552 (Old S.C.No.092592683170) forthwith on payment of the current consumption charges for the relevant period without imposing any penalty.

¶13

For Petitioner : Mr.Imayavaramban

¶14

For Respondents : Mr.L.Jai Venkatesh

¶15

ORDER

¶16

This writ petition has been filed for issuance of writ of mandamus, directing the respondents to immediately restore the service connection to the petitioner.

¶17

2.The case of the petitioner is that the 4^th respondent had provided electricity service connection to the petitioner and subsequently it was transferred to 3^rd respondent.

¶18

3.The grievance of the petitioner is that the 4^th respondent as well as the 3^rd respondent, simultaneously demanding payment from the petitioner and the reply submitted by the petitioner was also not properly considered.

¶19

4.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would state that when the writ petition is listed for admission, the petitioner was directed to pay Rs.9 lakhs for restoration of the electricity service connection and after making such payment, electricity service connection to the petitioner was also restored. The petitioner is ready to pay a reasonable amount to the electricity board. But no opportunity was given to them.

¶20

5.The learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents referring to the counter and additional counter filed by the respondents, denied the allegation of double billing made by the respondents 3 and 4.

¶21

6.However, considering the facts and circumstances of this case, the 3^rd respondent is directed to provide opportunity to the petitioner and shall pass orders afresh. The fact that the electricity service connection was already restored to the petitioner can also be taken note of, while considering the grievance of the petitioner.

¶22

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

¶23

7.With the above observation, this writ petition stands disposed of. No costs. Consequently connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

¶24

Sd/Assistant Registrar(CS-IV)

¶25

//True Copy//

¶26

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶27

Jer

¶28

¶29

The Executive Engineer, (Operation and Maintenance), Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation Ltd., (TANGEDCO Limited), Tambaram, Chennai 600045.

¶30

The Assistant Executive Engineer, (Operation and Maintenance), Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation Ltd., (TANGEDCO Limited), Chennai Electricity Distribution Circle, Chennai South, Keezhkatalai, Chennai 600045. 3. The Assistant Engineer, (Operation and Maintenance), Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation Ltd., (TANGEDCO Limited), Chennai Electricity Distribution Circle, Chennai South, Keezhkatalai, Chennai 600045. 4. The Assistant Engineer, (Operation and Maintenance), Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation Ltd., (TANGEDCO Limited), Chennai Electricity Distribution Circle, Chennai South, Kovilambakkam, Chennai.

¶31

+1cc to Mr.L.Jaivenkatesh, Advocate, S.R.No.18251

¶32

W.P.No.31195 of 2013 PL(CO) SB(21/04/2022)

¶33

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

M/S.Indus Towers Ltd., v. the Executive Engineer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S.Indus Towers Ltd., v. the Executive 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

Ponnaiyah Ramajayam Vs Anna University

G.Gangavaikai Vs the Secretary to Union of

Mathivanan, S/O.Sengodan, Vs the Tamilnadu Electricity

Murugan Talkies Vs State of Tamilnadu

Seshasayee Paper and Boards Vs The Tangedco

The Stud Manager Vs Tamilnadu Electricity Board