Shri Rohith Spinners Private Limited, Vs Tamilnadu Electricity Regulatory Commission

¶1

WP No. 28211 of 2026

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 20-07-2026

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ

¶6

WP No. 28211 of 2026 AND

¶7

WMP NO. 30901 OF 2026

¶8

Shri Rohith Spinners Private Limited, SF No.448/1,2,3, Patharai Village, Veppadai, Kumarapalayam, Namakkal - 638008. Represented by its Managing Director S.Anand.

¶9

..Petitioner(s)

¶10

Vs

¶11

Tamilnadu Electricity Regulatory Commission 4TH Floor, SIDCO Building, Thiru.Vi.Ka Industrial Estate, Guindy, Chennai - 600032. Represented by its Secretary.

¶12

Tamilnadu Power Distribution Corporation Ltd., (TNPDCL) 10TH Floor, 144, Anna Salai, Chennai - 600002. Represented by its Managing Director.

¶13

Director Finance Tamilnadu Power Distribution Corporation Ltd., (TNPDCL), 144, Anna Salai, Chennai - 600002.

¶14

The Superintending Engineer (TNPDCL) Namakkal Electricity Distribution Circle, Namakkal.

¶15

The Superintending Engineer (TNPDCL) Turicorin Electricity Distribution Circle, Tuticorin.

¶16

..Respondent(s)

¶17

PRAYER : Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus, to forbear the respondents and their men, agents from

¶18

Page1 of 6

¶19

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

¶20

WP No. 28211 of 2026

¶21

collecting current consumption charges, demand charges and any arrears from the petitioner H.T.Sc.No.049094370454 until the respondents makes payment of the outstanding dues of Rs.17,63,513/- for the year of 2025-2026 payable to the petitioner or give adjustment in the current consumption charges payable by the petitioner till the entire amount is adjusted.

¶22

For Petitioner(s): Mr.R.S.Pandiyaraj For Respondent(s): Mr.S.Kalaiselvan, Standing Counsel

¶23

Order

¶24

This Writ Petition has been filed to forbear the respondents and their men, agents from collecting current consumption charges, demand charges and any arrears from the petitioner H.T.Sc.No.049094370454 until the respondents makes payment of the outstanding dues of Rs.17,63,513/- for the year of 20252026 payable to the petitioner or give adjustment in the current consumption charges payable by the petitioner till the entire amount is adjusted.

¶25

Learned counsel for petitioner and respondents would submit in unison

¶26

that under similar circumstances, this Court in W.P.No.21032 of 2026 vide order dated 05.06.2026, issued the following directions and that the same directions may be issued in this writ petition:

¶27

“By consent of learned counsel on both sides, this writ petition is taken up for final disposal at the admission stage itself.

¶28

2. This Writ Petition has been filed seeking a Writ of

¶29

Page2 of 6

¶30

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

¶31

WP No. 28211 of 2026

¶32

Mandamus, forbearing the respondents and their men, agents from collecting current consumption charges, demand charges and any arrears from petitioner until the respondents makes payment of the outstanding dues payable to petitioner or give adjustment in the current consumption charges payable by petitioner till the entire amount is adjusted.

¶33

3. Learned counsel for petitioner would submit that petitioner is a Textile Mill which generates wind energy, which is captively consumed. He would submit that in terms of the Comprehensive Tariff Order on Wind Energy in Order No.1 of 2009 dated 20.03.2009 issued by the Tamil Nadu Electricity Regulatory Commission, the unutilised energy at the end of the financial year is liable to be encashed at the rate of 75% of the purchase tariff. A wheeling agreement was entered into, which also provides a clause enabling encashment of unutilised energy in terms of the purchase tariff. He would submit that there is an accrued liability in terms of the said clause with regard to surplus wind energy that has been generated. He would also submit that in an identical circumstance, this Court had passed an order in W.P.No.32144 of 2025 dated 22.08.2025, and the relevant portion of order is extracted hereunder:

¶34

“3. Accordingly, this writ petition shall stand disposed of in similar terms with a direction to the respondents to adjust the amount of Rs.10,65,675/- (for the year of 20242025) payable by the respondents to the petitioner towards the electricity supplied to them by the petitioner, with the current

¶35

__________ Page3 of 6

¶36

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

¶37

WP No. 28211 of 2026

¶38

consumption charges, demand charges payable by the petitioner, till the entire amount is adjusted or exhausted. The respondents shall not take any coercive steps against the petitioner for disconnection of power supply till entire outstanding amount payable to the petitioner by respondents gets adjusted towards current consumption charges, demand charges etc., payable by the petitioner.”

¶39

The learned counsel for petitioner would therefore only seek similar directions.

¶40

4. Learned Standing Counsel for respondents would submit that they do not have any serious objections to the above request / prayer.

¶41

5. In view of the above submission, this Court directs the respondents to adjust the amount of Rs.25,47,664/- (for the year of 2018-2019) payable by the respondents to petitioner towards the electricity supplied to them by petitioner, with the current consumption charges, demand charges payable by petitioner, till the entire amount is adjusted or exhausted. The respondents shall not take any coercive steps against petitioner for disconnection of power supply till entire outstanding amount payable to petitioner by respondents gets adjusted towards current consumption charges, demand charges etc., payable by petitioner.

¶42

6. Accordingly, this Writ Petition stands disposed of. No Costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.”

¶43

__________ Page4 of 6

¶44

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

¶45

WP No. 28211 of 2026

¶46

In view of the above submission, this Court directs the respondents to

¶47

adjust the amount of Rs.17,63,513/- for the year of 2025-2026 payable by the respondents to petitioner towards the electricity supplied to them by petitioner, with the current consumption charges, demand charges payable by petitioner, till the entire amount is adjusted or exhausted. The respondents shall not take any coercive steps against petitioner for disconnection of power supply till entire outstanding amount payable to petitioner by respondents gets adjusted towards current consumption charges, demand charges etc., payable by petitioner.

¶48

Accordingly, this Writ Petition stands disposed of. No Costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

¶49

20-07-2026

¶50

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

¶51

GSK

¶52

__________ Page5 of 6

¶53

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

¶54

WP No. 28211 of 2026

¶55

MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ J.

¶56

GSK

¶57

To

¶58

Tamilnadu Electricity Regulatory Commission 4TH Floor, SIDCO Building, Thiru.Vi.Ka Industrial Estate, Guindy, Chennai - 600032. Represented by its Secretary.

¶59

Tamilnadu Power Distribution Corporation Ltd., (TNPDCL) 10TH Floor, 144, Anna Salai, Chennai - 600002. Represented by its Managing Director.

¶60

Director Finance Tamilnadu Power Distribution Corporation Ltd., (TNPDCL), 144, Anna Salai, Chennai - 600002.

¶61

The Superintending Engineer (TNPDCL) Namakkal Electricity Distribution Circle, Namakkal.

¶62

The Superintending Engineer (TNPDCL) Turicorin Electricity Distribution Circle, Tuticorin.

¶63

WP No. 28211 of 2026 and WMP NO. 30901 OF 2026

¶64

20-07-2026

¶65

__________ Page6 of 6

¶66

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

Shri Rohith Spinners Private Limited, v. Tamilnadu Electricity Regulatory Commission

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shri Rohith Spinners Private Limited, v. Tamilnadu Electricity Regulatory Commission

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

N.Rajamannar Vs the District Collector

P.Seetha Vs the Superintending Engineer (Electrical)

Arumugapandi Vs the Commissioner of Land Administration

Sri Keshav Indo Space Private Limited Vs The Regional Director

Sakthi Auto Component Ltd., Vs Tamil Nadu Power Distribution Corporation Ltd. (Tnpdcl)

Subramaniyam Vs Durgamoorthi, I.a.S., and 2 others