Allowed¶35

The Chairman v. Marg Ltd.

Madras HC10 Mar 2026WA/2060/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Tamil Nadu Electricity Board v Marg Ltd; WA No. 2060 of 2023; writ appeal allowed; writ order 20.09.2022 in W.P.No. 15908 of 2008 set aside; demand notice for monthly minimum charges; writ petition without exhausting statutory remedy not maintainable; Article 226 alternate remedy; follows Madras HC judgment dated 03.03.2026 in W.A.Nos.1928 & 1936 of 2023; no costs; C.M.P.No.17512 of 2023 closed.

What did the court decide?

Writ order dated 20.09.2022 in W.P.No. 15908 of 2008 set aside; Writ Appeal allowed with no costs; connected miscellaneous petition C.M.P.No.17512 of 2023 closed. ¶35

The Chairman Vs Marg Ltd. — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Writ order dated 20.09.2022 in W.P.No. 15908 of 2008 set aside; Writ Appeal allowed with no costs; connected miscellaneous petition C.M.P.No.17512 of 2023 closed.

¶35

Issue for consideration

Whether the writ petition filed by Marg Limited challenging the demand notice for recovery of monthly minimum charges, without exhausting the statutory remedy, was maintainable/entertainable. +1 more

¶25

Court's answer

By allowing the appeal and setting aside the writ order, this Court treated the respondent's writ petition challenging the demand notice without exhausting the statutory remedy as not entertainable, consistent with its earlier judgment; the general proposition itself is that of the earlier judgment followed herein, not independently restated.

¶35

Ratio / Principle

In view of this Court's earlier judgment in similar facts (W.A.Nos.1928 & 1936 of 2023, dated 03.03.2026), which held that writ petitions against demand notices are not maintainable unless the demand is by an incompetent authority without jurisdiction or is tainted with mala fides and must otherwise be challenged by exhausting alternate statutory remedies, the present Writ Appeal deserves to be allowed.

¶35

Key takeaways

The writ order impugned is set aside and the Writ Appeal stands allowed, with no costs; connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.ratio¶35

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Madras High Court (S.M. Subramaniam and K. Surender JJ.) allowed the Tamil Nadu Electricity Board's Writ Appeal (WA No. 2060 of 2023) and set aside the writ order dated 20.09.2022 in W.P.No. 15908 of 2008, by which the writ Court had allowed Marg Ltd (formerly MARG Constructions Ltd.) to challenge the Board's demand notice for recovery of monthly minimum charges. Following this Court's own judgment dated 03.03.2026 in W.A.Nos.1928 & 1936 of 2023 - that writ petitions against demand notices are not maintainable unless the demand is made by an incompetent authority having no jurisdiction or is tainted with mala fides, and must otherwise be challenged before the competent authority by exhausting alternate statutory remedies, with writ Courts expected to exercise restraint - the Court held the appeal deserved to be allowed, set aside the writ order, allowed the appeal with no costs, and closed C.M.P.No.17512 of 2023.

¶1

WA No. 2060 of 2023

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 10-03-2026

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S. M. SUBRAMANIAM

¶6

AND

¶7

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE K. SURENDER

¶8

WA No. 2060 of 2023 and C.M.P.No.17512 of 2023

¶9

The Chairman Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, No.800, Anna Salai, Chennai 2.

¶10

The Superintending Engineer Chennai Electricity Distribution Circle South, K.K. Nagar, Chennai 78.

¶11

..Appellant(s)

¶12

¶13

Marg Ltd Formerly Known as MARG Constructions Ltd., Rep by Mr. M. Sivaraman, Head Legal and Authorised Signatory, No.4/318, Marg Axis, Old Mahabalipuram Road, Kottivakkam, Chennai 41.

¶14

..Respondent(s)

¶15

To set aside the order dated 20.09.2022 made in WP.No. 15908 of 2008.

¶16

For Appellant(s): Mr.P.Kumaresan, Additional Advocate General assisted by Mr.L.Jaivenkatesh

¶17

For Respondent(s): A.Gokula Krishna

¶18

Page1 of 4

¶19

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

¶20

WA No. 2060 of 2023

¶21

JUDGMENT

¶22

(Judgment of the Court was delivered by S.M.Subramaniam J.)

¶23

Under assail is the writ order dated 20.09.2022 passed in W.P.No. 15908 of 2008.

¶24

The Tamil Nadu Electricity Board is the appellant before this Court. The respondent, Marg Limited, instituted the writ proceedings challenging the demand notice issued for recovery of monthly minimum charges. Since the writ Court allowed the writ petition, the Electricity Board has preferred the present intra- Court appeal.

¶25

In the present case, the respondent had challenged the demand notice before the writ court without exhausting the statutory remedy. This Court in similar facts and circumstances, vide judgment dated 03.03.2026, passed in W.A.Nos.1928 & 1936 of 2023, has held that when a statutory remedy is available for enforcing the right or liability, before exhausting the same, filing writ petition, invoking the discretionary remedy under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, cannot be entertained. The relevant paragraphs of the said judgment are extracted hereunder:

¶26

22. This Court holds that the writ petitions filed against

¶27

the demand notices issued by the Board as well as the authorities are not maintainable. Such demand letters, per se, cannot provide a cause of action unless such demand is made by an incompetent authority having no jurisdiction or is

¶28

Page2 of 4

¶29

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

¶30

WA No. 2060 of 2023

¶31

tainted with the allegations of mala fides. In all other circumstances, the demand notice is to be challenged before

¶32

the competent authority by exhausting the alternate remedies contemplated under the statutes and Rules. Entertaining such writ petitions by the High Court results in prejudice to either of the parties, and that being the situation, the writ Courts are expected to exercise restraint in entertaining such writ petitions filed challenging the demand notices or show cause notices.

¶33

23. With these observations, the impugned order dated 25.07.2022 passed in W.P.Nos.36209 of 2007 and 23556 of

¶34

2008 is set aside and Writ Appeals stand allowed. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶35

In view of the judgment delivered by this Court in similar issue cited supra, the present Writ Appeal deserves to be allowed. Accordingly, the writ order impugned is set aside and the Writ Appeal stands allowed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.

¶36

(S.M.S.,J.) (K.S.,J.) 10-03-2026

¶37

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

¶38

VSI

¶39

__________ Page3 of 4

¶40

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

¶41

WA No. 2060 of 2023