Disposed

M/s.Chakravarthy Fabric private Limited v. The Chairman

Madras HC2 Mar 2023WP/6365/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this Writ Petition, the petitioner sought direction forbidding collection of electricity charges by the Respondent Authority until a refundable security deposit of Rs.20,00,000/- related to a solar power plant was refunded or adjusted. The Court disposed of the petition by directing adjustment of the deposit against current bills without interest.

What did the court decide?

The refundable security deposit of Rs.20,00,000/- shall be adjusted with current consumption charges from the next bill without interest; no disconnection order to be passed during the adjustment peri

M/s.Chakravarthy Fabric private Limited Vs The Chairman — Service and Employment | Madras HC (2023)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 02.03.2023

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE C.V.KARTHIKEYAN

¶6

W.P.No.6365 of 2023

¶7

and

¶8

W.M.P.No.6400 of 2023

¶9

M/s.Chakravarthy Fabric Private Limited, S.F.No.68/1, Oviyampalayam, Paramathy (Po), P.Velur (Tk), Namakkal-637 207 Rep By its Executive Director S.Deepa Chakravarthy

¶10

.. Petitioner

¶11

Vs.

¶12

1.The Chairman, Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation Limited, 144, Anna Salai, Chennai-600 002.

¶13

Chief Engineer, Non-Conventional Energy Sources, Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation Limited, 144, Anna Salai, Chennai-600 002.

¶14

The Superintending Engineer Non-Conventional Energy Sources, TANGEDCO,

¶15

Udumalpet Electricity Distribution Circle, Udumalpet.

¶16

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

¶17

¶18

The Superintending Engineer, TANGEDCO, Namakkal Electricity Distribution Circle, Namakkal. .. Respondents

¶19

Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other Writ or Direction in the nature of a Writ, forbearing the Respondent and their men, agents from collecting current consumption charges, demand charges and any arrears from the petitioner's HTSC No.049094370353 till the entire outstanding dues of Rs.20,00,000/- payable to the petitioner along with interest towards refundable security deposit in the account of the Petitioner's Solar Power Plant HTSC No.0495514370022 is paid or give adjustment in the current consumption charges payable by the Petitioner till the entire amount is adjusted.

¶20

For Petitioner .. M/s.R.S.Pandiyaraj

¶21

For Respondents For R1 to R4 .. Mr.L.Jaivenkatesh (TNEB)

¶22

ORDER

¶23

The Writ Petition has been filed in the nature of Mandamus seeking a

¶24

direction against the respondents forbearing them from collecting current

¶25

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

¶26

¶27

consumption charges, demand charges and any arrears from the petitioner's HTSC No. 049094370353 till the entire outstanding dues of Rs.20,00,000/-

¶28

payable to the petitioner along with interest towards refundable security deposit in the account of the petitioner's Solar Power Plant HTSC No. 0495514370022 is paid or given adjustment in the current consumption charges payable by the petitioner till the entire amount is adjusted.

¶29

2. In the affidavit filed in support of the Writ Petition, it had been stated that the petitioner has a Solar Power Plant bearing Solar HTSC No. 0495514370022. It is under the jurisdiction of the third respondent / the Superintending Engineer, Non-Conventional Energy Sources, TANGEDCO, Udumalpet. It is stated that electricity is produced from the Solar Power Plant. The said electricity is also supplied to the respondents. It is stated that the petitioner had applied by letter dated 21.12.2020 for establishment of the said Solar Power Plant. Security Deposit of Rs.10,00,000/- was paid on 07.02.2022 and another sum of Rs.10,00,000/was paid on 11.07.2022. The plant was also commissioned. This was also informed. The petitioner claims refund of the refundable Security Deposit of Rs.20,00,000/- paid. It is stated that the respondents had not refunded the

¶30

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

¶31

¶32

amount. The respondent has been collecting the current consumption charges and had also demanded charges and arrears from the petitioner herein. The petitioner seeks adjustment of the refundable Security Deposit with the current consumption charges.

¶33

3. I am informed that there are several orders by learned Single Judges of this Court passed in this regard. A perusal of the same reveals that directions have been given to adjust the refundable Security Deposit, in this case, Rs.20,00,000/-, with the current consumption charges. Though the petitioner had sought that such adjustment to be made with interest at Rs.20,00,000/-, that request is not granted. The sum of Rs.20,00,000/- paid as a Security Deposit alone shall be adjusted with the current consumption charges from the next consumption bill raised by the second respondent herein. Till the adjustment is over, the petitioner should not suffer any order of disconnection.

¶34

4. The Writ Petition stands disposed of. No order as to costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.

¶35

02.03.2023 (1/5)

¶36

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

Index:Yes/No ata

1.The Chairman,

¶41

Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation Limited, 144, Anna Salai, Chennai-600 002.

¶42

Chief Engineer, Non-Conventional Energy Sources, Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation Limited, 144, Anna Salai, Chennai-600 002.

¶43

The Superintending Engineer Non-Conventional Energy Sources, TANGEDCO,

¶44

Udumalpet Electricity Distribution Circle, Udumalpet.

¶45

The Superintending Engineer, TANGEDCO,

¶46

Namakkal Electricity Distribution Circle, Namakkal.

¶47

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

¶48

¶49

C.V.KARTHIKEYAN,J.

ata

W.P.No.6365 of 2023

02.03.2023 (1/5)

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

M/s.Chakravarthy Fabric private Limited v. The Chairman

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/s.Chakravarthy Fabric private Limited v. The Chairman

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

R.Harresh Kuumar Vs The Registrar

Rajendran Vs The District Collector

M/s.Saravana Green Energy LLP Vs The Chairman

G.Meera Vs The Superintending Engineer

Josephine Maria Yogamalar Vs The Tahsildar

M/s.Cheran Textiles wind farm LLP Vs The Chairman