Madras High Court
Srf Ltd vs Tamil Nadu Electricity Board on 26 August, 2019
Author: M.Dhandapani
Bench: M.Dhandapani
W.P.No.20108 of 2010
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 26.08.2019
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI
W.P.No.20108 of 2010
And
M.P.Nos.1 and 2 of 2010
SRF Ltd.
Rep. by its Authorized Signatory ... Petitioner
Vs.
1.Tamil Nadu Electricity Board,
Rep by its Chairman,
800, Anna Salai,
Chennai – 600 002.
2.The Chief Engineer/ NCES
Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, II Floor
NPKRR Maaligai, 800 Anna Salai,
Chennai 600 002.
3.Superintending Engineer,
Chennai EDC/North
Chennai – 600 002. ... Respondents
Prayer:
Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to
issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records of the
3rd respondent comprised in its impugned notice Lr.No.SE/CEDC/N/
AAO/HT1263/A2/D750/10, dated 13.7.2010 by incorrectly calculating
the amount payable by the petitioner by following an entirely incorrect
approach by an arbitrary change in the formula for calculation that was
1/5
http://www.judis.nic.in
W.P.No.20108 of 2010
approved by the Hon'ble TNERC and consequently direct the
respondents to forthwith refund an amount of Rs.17,41,620/- to the
petitioner in line with the revised workings as per the orders of the
Hon'ble TNERC.
For Petitioner : Mr.Rahul Balaji
For Respondents : Mr.Aravind Pandian, AAG
Assisted by
Mr.S.K.Rameshwar
ORDER
The issue raised in the present writ petition has already been settled before the Appellate Tribunal for Electricity (APTEL). The writ petition challenges the excess charges levied for exceeding quota by the 3rd respondent. In this regard, the Tamil Nadu Electricity Regulatory Commission has passed an order on 04.05.2010, relevant portion of which reads as follows:
"Para 11.7 para 3.9 of the order of the commission in RPNO.2 of 2008 explicitly states as follows, It must be borne in mind that excess demand charges and excess energy charges are liable in addition to the penalty of drastic reduction of electricity supply to 5% (or 10%) during the following 48 hrs as the case may be for violation of restriction and control measures."2/5
http://www.judis.nic.in W.P.No.20108 of 2010
2.Against which, the aggrieved similarly placed persons filed appeal before the Appellate Tribunal for Electricity (APTEL) and obtained final order on 11.01.2011.
3.In this regard, the Tamil Nadu Electricity Board approached the Hon'ble Supreme Court by filing Civil Appeal Nos.1090 – 1099 of 2011 and the Hon'ble Supreme Court vide order dated 04.02.2011 entertained the Civil Appeals against the judgment of the Appellate Tribunal. On a perusal of the interim order dated 04.02.2011, there is a direction to the appellant therein/Tamil Nadu Electricity Board to furnish Bank Guarantee of a Nationalized Bank in favour of the Registrar (Judicial) of the Hon'ble Supreme Court.
4. Since the issue involved in the present writ petition is pending before the Hon'ble Supreme Court at the instigation of the respondent herein/ Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, the writ petition is disposed of directing the respondent to maintain status-quo as on date. Subject to the outcome of the Supreme Court order, the parties may seek remedy in the manner known to law.
3/5http://www.judis.nic.in W.P.No.20108 of 2010
5.Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs.
Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.
26.08.2019 pri Speaking Order/ Non Speaking Order Index: Yes/ No Internet: Yes/ No To
1.Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, Rep by its Chairman, 800, Anna Salai, Chennai – 600 002.
2.The Chief Engineer/ NCES Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, II Floor NPKRR Maaligai, 800 Anna Salai, Chennai 600 002.
3.Superintending Engineer, Chennai EDC/North Chennai – 600 002.
4/5http://www.judis.nic.in W.P.No.20108 of 2010 M.DHANDAPANI,J.
pri W.P.No.20108 of 2010 And M.P.Nos.1 and 2 of 2010 26.08.2019 5/5 http://www.judis.nic.in