Madras High Court
M/S.Hi-Tech Carbon vs The Tamil Nadu Electricity Regulatory ... on 16 July, 2020
Author: M.Duraiswamy
Bench: M.Duraiswamy
W.P.No.9744 of 2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 16.07.2020
CORAM :
The HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.DURAISWAMY
W.P.No.9744 of 2013
M/s.Hi-Tech Carbon,
(A Unit of Aditya Birla Nuvo Ltd.),
K-16, Phase II,
SIPCOT Industrial Area,
Thiruallur – 601 201 ... Petitioner
v.
The Tamil Nadu Electricity Regulatory Commission,
Rep. By its Secretary,
19A, Rukmini Lakshmipathy Salai
Egmore,
Chennai – 600 008. ... Respondent
Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
for issuing a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to :
a. amend the Tamil Nadu Electricity
Regulatory Commission (Renewable Purchase
Obligations), 2010, if necessary, to bring it line with
the letter and spirit of the provisions of Section 86 of
Page 1/5
http://www.judis.nic.in
W.P.No.9744 of 2013
the Electricity Act, 2003 and the judgment of the
Appellate Tribunal for Electricity in Appeal No.57 of
2009 by both considering power from cogeneration
plants, irrespective of fuel source, as being entitled to
participate in the renewable Energy Certificate
mechanism and fixing the percentage of electricity
that has to be purchased from such category of
sources by the obligated entities.
b. clarify whether the petitioner falls under the
definition of Grid Connected Captive Power Plant.
For Petitioner : Mr. Rahul Balaji
For Respondent : Mr. T. Mohan
ORDER
The petitioner has filed the above Writ Petition to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to :
a. amend the Tamil Nadu Electricity
Regulatory Commission (Renewable Purchase
Obligations), 2010, if necessary, to bring it line with the letter and spirit of the provisions of Section 86 of the Electricity Act, 2003 and the judgment of the Page 2/5 http://www.judis.nic.in W.P.No.9744 of 2013 Appellate Tribunal for Electricity in Appeal No.57 of 2009 by both considering power from cogeneration plants, irrespective of fuel source, as being entitled to participate in the renewable Energy Certificate mechanism and fixing the percentage of electricity that has to be purchased from such category of sources by the obligated entities.
b. clarify whether the petitioner falls under the definition of Grid Connected Captive Power Plant.
2. When the Writ Petition is taken up for hearing, Mr. Rahul Balaji, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, submitted that in view of the order passed by the Full Bench of the Appellate Tribunal in Appeal No.53 of 2012 in the matter of Lloyds Metal & Energy Ltd. v.
Maharashtra Electricity Regulatory Commission, the petitioner is not pressing the first prayer. So far as the 2nd prayer is concerned, Mr.Rahul Balaji, submitted that he has got instruction that the petitioner would approach the appropriate authority seeking for appropriate relief.
3. Mr. T. Mohan, learned counsel appearing for the respondent Page 3/5 http://www.judis.nic.in W.P.No.9744 of 2013 submitted that the relief sought for in the Writ Petition cannot be granted to the petitioner and the Writ Petition is liable to be dismissed.
4. In view of the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side, since the petitioner is not pressing the first prayer and submitted that they would approach the appropriate authority, while dismissing the Writ Petition, I make it clear that it is open to the petitioner to approach the appropriate authority seeking for appropriate relief, in accordance with law, if so advised. No costs.
16.07.2020 Index : Yes/No Internet : Yes Rj To The Secretary, Tamil Nadu Electricity Regulatory Commission, 19A, Rukmini Lakshmipathy Salai, Egmore, Chennai – 600 008.
Page 4/5http://www.judis.nic.in W.P.No.9744 of 2013 M.DURAISWAMY, J Rj W.P.No.9744 of 2013 16.07.2020 Page 5/5 http://www.judis.nic.in