Dismissed

Bannari Amman Sugars Limited v. the Executive Engineer

Madras HC10 Apr 2023WP/15722/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This is a writ petition challenging a demand order for water consumption charges. The Court held that industries must pay such charges and that discrepancies must be rectified through authorities. The writ petitions for certiorari to quash the demand letters were disposed of without interference.

What did the court decide?

Writ petitions for issuance of writ of certiorari and to quash the demand letters were disposed of dismissing the same.

Bannari Amman Sugars Limited Vs the Executive Engineer — Service and Employment | Madras HC (2023)

¶1

W.P.Nos.15722, 15723 & 15724 of 2012

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED : 10.04.2023

¶4

CORAM :

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM

¶6

W.P.Nos.15722, 15723 & 15724 of 2012 and M.P.Nos.1 & 2 of 2012

¶7

Bannari Amman Sugars Limited (Distillery Division) Represented by its Company Secretariat Sri C Palaniswamy having its registered office at 1212 Trichy Road, Coimbatore 641 018. ..

¶8

Petitioner in .. all W.Ps

¶9

¶10

The Executive Engineer Public Works Department Bhavanisagar Dam Division Bhavanisagar.

¶11

The State of Tamil Nadu Rep. by the Secretary to Government Public Works Department Fort St. George, Chennai – 600 009.

¶12

[R2 impleaded vide order dated 12.07.2012 in M.P.No.3 of 2012 in W.P.Nos.15722 to 15724 of 2012]

¶13

Respondents in all W.Ps

¶14

Prayer in W.P.No.15722 of 2012: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a Writ of Certiorari, calling for the records relating to the proceedings of the respondent bearing Letter No.VAPA/EVAA2/KO.PA.A.SU(SU)/248M/2012 dated 5.6.2012 and quash the same;

¶15

Prayer in W.P.No.15723 of 2012: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of

¶16

the Constitution of India for issuance of a Writ of Certiorari, calling for the https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶17

Page 1 of 6

¶18

W.P.Nos.15722, 15723 & 15724 of 2012

¶19

records relating to the proceedings of the respondent bearing Letter No.VAPA/EVAA2/KO.PA.A.SU(SU)/250M/2012 dated 5.6.2012 and quash the same;

¶20

Prayer in W.P.No.15724 of 2012: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a Writ of Certiorari, calling for the records relating to the proceedings of the respondent bearing Letter No.VAPA/EVAA2/KO.PA.A.SU(SU)/249M/2012 dated 5.6.2012 and quash the same.

¶21

For Petitioners in Mr.V.Kalyana Raman all W.Ps : for M/s.Aiyer and Dolia For Respondents in Mr.T.Arunkumar all W.Ps : Additional Government Pleader for R1 & R2

¶22

ORDER

¶23

The order of demand to pay the water consumption charges

¶24

issued by the respondent in the proceeding dated 05.06.2012 is under challenge in the present writ petition.

¶25

The petitioner is M/s.Bannari Amman Sugars Limited. The

¶26

petitioner admittedly were consuming water from the river Bhavani for their industrial usage and with reference to the usage of water, the second respondent conducted an inspection and accordingly, demanded the arrears of water charges to be paid by the petitioner.

¶27

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶28

Page 2 of 6

¶29

W.P.Nos.15722, 15723 & 15724 of 2012

¶30

No doubt, the industries on the usage of river water is bound

¶31

to pay the water charges to the Government. If at all, any dispute regarding the calculation or otherwise, they are bound to approach the authorities for clarification or to get further details regarding the assessment made by the competent authorities for such demand. Contrarily, High Court cannot interfere with such demand letters issued by the competent authorities to recover the water consumption charges. More specifically, the petitioner has utilised the water from the river for industrial purposes and that being the case, they are bound to settle the water charges. The discrepancies, if any, in the order of the demand, are to be rectified only through the authorities and the High Court in a writ proceeding cannot conduct a roving inquiry regarding the manner through which the calculations are made and the demand order is passed.

¶32

Thus, the petitioner is at liberty to seek clarification if any doubt remains or otherwise, and the water consumption charges are bound to be settled in accordance with the law. Merely under the guise of clarification, the petitioner cannot delay the payment of water charges which is statutory in nature.

¶33

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶34

Accordingly, the writ petition stands disposed of. There will

¶35

Page 3 of 6

¶36

W.P.Nos.15722, 15723 & 15724 of 2012

¶37

be no order as to costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.

¶38

Index : Yes/No 10.04.2023 Neutral Citation : Yes/No drm

¶39

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶40

Page 4 of 6

¶41

W.P.Nos.15722, 15723 & 15724 of 2012

¶42

To:

¶43

The Executive Engineer Public Works Department Bhavanisagar Dam Division Bhavanisagar.

¶44

The Secretary to Government The State of Tamil Nadu Public Works Department Fort St. George, Chennai – 600 009.

¶45

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶46

Page 5 of 6

¶47

W.P.Nos.15722, 15723 & 15724 of 2012

¶48

S.M. SUBRAMANIAM, J.

¶49

drm

¶50

W.P.Nos.15722, 15723 & 15724 of 2012

¶51

10.04.2023

¶52

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶53

Page 6 of 6

Bannari Amman Sugars Limited v. the Executive Engineer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bannari Amman Sugars Limited 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

S.Easwaran Vs the Tahsildar

E.Venkatesan Vs The Secretary

Thangaraj (deceased) Vs Chief General Manager

B.Poornachandar Vs The Government of India

Ko.Munetram Vs Chief Election Officer

M/S. Galaxy Ameze Kingdom Vs Union of India