Disposed¶38

M/s. Sashwath Construction Private Limited, v. The Director / Distribution

Madras HC4 Apr 2025WP(MD)/9524/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Unauthorized use of electricity; penal assessment under Section 126(5)(6), Electricity Act, 2003; penalty under section 135; review under Section 127(1) Electricity Act, 2003; Consumer Grievance Redressal Forum as competent forum; Regulation 18, Tamil Nadu Electricity Supply Code; alternative remedy/forum; writ of certiorarified mandamus; Tamil Nadu Power Distribution Corporation Limited; disposal by consent at admission stage; three-month limitation to approach CGRF; no costs.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed of with directions to the petitioner to approach the concerned Consumer Grievance Redressal Forum within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of the order to raise all objections on the grounds raised in the writ petition; no costs; connected miscellaneous petitions closed. ¶38

M/s. Sashwath Construction Private Limited, Vs The… — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶38

Issue for consideration

Whether the impugned orders dated 14.10.2024 (final assessment) and 26.12.2024 (appellate) imposing penalty for alleged unauthorized use of electricity are liable to be quashed, and whether the 4th respondent should be directed to reconsider the petitioner's appeal dated 30.10.2024 and withdraw the penalty imposed under section 135. +1 more

¶19

Ratio / Principle

The petitioner's grievance regarding levying of penal charges alleging unauthorized use of electricity falls within the purview of Regulation 18 of the Tamil Nadu Electricity Supply Code, and under the provisions of the Act the Consumer Grievance Redressal Forum is the competent forum to address any objections or grievances related to such matters.

¶34

Key takeaways

The petitioner is directed to approach the concerned Consumer Grievance Redressal Forum to raise all his objections on the grounds raised in the writ petition, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of the order.ratio¶34

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Madras High Court, Madurai Bench (Vivek Kumar Singh, J.) — By consent, disposed of at admission a writ petition under Article 226 by M/s. Sashwath Construction Private Limited challenging a final assessment order dated 14.10.2024 demanding Rs.15,17,888/- and an appellate order dated 26.12.2024 levying Rs.7,08,292/- as penal charges for alleged unauthorized use of electricity (provisional assessment of Rs.22,85,664/- under Section 126(5)(6) of the Electricity Act, 2003; review under Section 127(1) having been rejected). Held that the grievance regarding levy of such penal charges falls within the purview of Regulation 18 of the Tamil Nadu Electricity Supply Code and that the Consumer Grievance Redressal Forum is the competent forum; petitioner directed to approach the concerned Forum within three months to raise all objections; no costs; connected miscellaneous petitions closed.

¶1

W.P.(MD).No.9524 of 2025

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 04.04.2025

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE VIVEK KUMAR SINGH

¶6

W.P.(MD)No.9524 of 2025 and W.P.(MD)No.7124 & 7127 of 2025

¶7

M/s. Sashwath Construction Private Limited, Represented by its Managing Director, Shri A. Chandramouli.

¶8

... Petitioner

¶9

-vs-

¶10

The Director / Distribution, Tamil Nadu Power Distribution Corporation Limited, No. 144, Anna Salai, Chennai 600 002.

¶11

The Chief Engineer / Distribution, Tamil Nadu Power Distribution Corporation Limited, Madurai Region, K.Pudur, Madurai 625002.

¶12

The Assistant Executive Engineer (O and M), North / Arasaradi (O and M) Sub Division, Tamil Nadu Power Distribution Corporation Limited, Madurai Electricity District Circle / Metro, A.A. Road, Arasaradi, Madurai – 625 016.

¶13

The Executive Engineer / Operation / Pasumalai,(Appellate Authority), Tamil Nadu Power Distribution Corporation Limited, Pasumalai, Madurai 625 004.

¶14

... Respondents

¶15

1/6

¶16

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

¶17

PRAYER

¶18

W.P.(MD).No.9524 of 2025

¶19

PRAYER : Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, after calling for the impugned orders vide LR. No. AEE/D/NORTH/ARSDI/CI/F-DOC/D.NO. 156 /2024, DATED 14-10-2024 and LR . NO. EE/O/PMI/F.APPEAL/D.NO.407/2024 DATED 26-12-2024, in the file of the 3^rd and 4^th respondents, and quash the same and direct the 4^th respondent to re-consider the appeal submitted by the petitioner dated 30-10-2024, and withdraw the penalty imposed to the petitioner under section 135, and thereby extend the same opportunity given to other similarly placed consumers.

¶20

For Petitioner : Mr.R.Muralikrishnan For Respondents : Mr.S.Deenadhayalan

¶21

ORDER

¶22

This writ petition has been filed challenging the impugned orders dated 14.10.2024 and dated 26.12.2024 on the file of the 3 rd and 4 th respondents respectively with a consequential direction to the 4 th respondent to re-consider the appeal submitted by the petitioner dated 30.10.2024 and withdraw the penalty imposed upon the petitioner under section 135 and thereby extend the same opportunity given to other similarly placed consumers.

¶23

2/6

¶24

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

¶25

W.P.(MD).No.9524 of 2025

¶26

2. By consent of both parties, this writ petition is disposed at the stage of admission itself.

¶27

3. The case of the petitioner is that an order of provisional assessment had been issued alleging unauthorized use of electricity and an amount of Rs.22,85,664/- had been levied as a penal charge under Section 126(5)(6) of the Electricity Act, 2003, for which the petitioner filed an objection and sought for a reasonable opportunity. However, it was denied and the third respondent passed the final assessment order on 14.10.2024 demanding penal amount of Rs.15,17,888/-. As against the same, the petitioner preferred an appeal before the fourth respondent and the fourth respondent passed the impugned order dated 26.12.2024 levying penal charges to the tune of Rs.7,08,292/- and the petitioner has also paid the said amount. Thereafter, the petitioner filed a review before the fourth respondent under Section 127(1) of the Electricity Act, 2003, which was rejected. Hence, this writ petition has been filed.

¶28

The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents submits that there is no provision of review under Section 127 of the Electricity Act,

¶29

3/6

¶30

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

¶31

W.P.(MD).No.9524 of 2025

¶32

2003, and the petitioner must approach the Consumer Grievance Redressal Forum to raise any objections under Regulation 18 of the Tamil Nadu Electricity Supply Code, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Under the provisions of the said statute, the Consumer Grievance Redressal Forum is the competent forum to address the grievances or objections arising under the Electricity Act, 2003.

¶33

Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the materials on record.

¶34

Upon considering the submissions, this Court finds that the petitioner’s grievance regarding levying of penal charges alleging unauthorized use of electricity falls within the purview of Regulation 18 of the Tamil Nadu Electricity Supply Code . Under the provisions of the Act, the Consumer Grievance Redressal Forum is the competent forum to address any objections or grievances related to such matters. Therefore, the petitioner is directed to approach the concerned Consumer Grievance Redressal Forum to raise all his objections on the grounds raised in this writ petition, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶35

4/6

¶36

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

¶37

W.P.(MD).No.9524 of 2025

¶38

7. This writ petition is disposed of with the above directions. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.

¶39

04.04.2025

¶40

NCC : Yes/No Index : Yes / No sm