M/S. Govindam Granities Vs the Superintendent Engineer (O and M)

¶1

WP No. 21362 of 2023

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 06-11-2025

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI

¶6

WP No. 21362 of 2023 & WMP NO. 20766 OF 2023

¶7

M/s. Govindam Granites No. 710 / 2c, Pathakotta Uddanapali Road Thuppuganapalli Panchayat Shoolaigir Taluka, Krishnagiri District

¶8

Petitioner(s)

¶9

Vs

¶10

The Superintendent Engineer (O And M) Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, Krishnagiri District

¶11

2.The Executive Engineer (O And M) Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, Krishnagiri District.

¶12

3.The Assistant Engineer (O And M) Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, Sholagiri Village And Taluks, Krishnagiri District

¶13

4.The Divisional Engineer ( O And M) Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, Shoolagiri Village And Taluk, Krishnagiri District.

¶14

Respondent(s)

¶15

This writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India, to issue a writ of Certiorari, to call for the records relating to the impugned demand letter in Ka. No. Se Po / O and M / K. Kiri / Tho / Nu / U. Ko. LTCT /No. 071 /23, dated 20.02.2023 issued by the 2nd respondent as illegal and quash the same.

¶16

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

¶17

WP No. 21362 of 2023

¶18

For Petitioner(s): G.M.Ananthakumar For Respondent(s): Mr.S.Madhusudhanan, Standing Counsel For TNEB

¶19

ORDER

¶20

This petition has been filed seeking to quash the impugned demand letter dated 20.02.2023 issued by the 2nd respondent.

¶21

It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner company is the owner of the lands in S.No.710/2C Pathakotta Village of Shoolagiri Taluk, Krishnagiri District and carrying on the business of finishing of the raw granite stones and availed electricity service connection from the respondents and paying the necessary consumption charges and deposits as and when called for by the respondents. In such circumstances, the petitioner made a complaint with the third respondent for non working of the meter from Nov-2020. Despite several requests, the third respondent did not visit the company to verify the meter either to repair or replace the same. But the third respondent issued demand letter on 04.01.2022 by enclosing the audit report and requested the petitioner to pay a sum of Rs.11,89,873/-. Aggrieved by the said demand letter writ petition have been filed before this Court and the same was quashed by directing the petitioner's company to pay 50% of the impugned demand letter. The petitioner preferred appeal before the third respondent challenging the fixation of electricity consumption charges before the 3^rd respondent. When the appeal is

¶22

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

¶23

WP No. 21362 of 2023

¶24

pending, the present impugned order was passed an order directing the petitioner to pay Rs.5,94,936/- Challenging the same, the present writ petition has been filed.

¶25

The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner did

¶26

not run the unit during the above said period and the same was informed to the respondents also. Without giving any opportunity to the petitioner, the second respondent has passed the present impugned order, which is not sustainable one.

¶27

The learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents submitted that as against the order passed by the original authority, there is an appeal remedy available before the Consumer Grievance Redressal Forum (CGRF). Without approaching the CGRF, the petitioner has filed a writ petition before this Court, which is not maintainable and the same is liable to dismissed.

¶28

Heard the learned counsel on either side and perused the materials available on record.

¶29

As rightly submitted by the learned Standing Counsel that since it is a dispute with regard to the electricity connection and charges, there is an appeal remedy available before the CGRF. In view of the above disputed question of fact, this Court cannot be decided the issue. If the petitioner is aggrieved over

¶30

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

¶31

WP No. 21362 of 2023

¶32

the issue, they have to approach the CGRF. Instead of doing that, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition, this Court also cannot interfere with the impugned order.

¶33

In the result, the writ petition is dismissed with a direction to the

¶34

petitioner to make an application before the CGRF within a period four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The respondents are directed not to disconnect the electricity connection of the petitioner's premises till such application is being filed by the petitioner. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is also closed.

¶35

06-11-2025

¶36

rli

¶37

Index:Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Internet:Yes Neutral Citation:Yes/No

¶38

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

¶39

WP No. 21362 of 2023

¶40

To