w w w . L a w y e r S e r v i c e s . i n


M/s. Sree Murugan Paper Mills P Ltd., Now known as M/s. Sri Satya Sai Paper and Board Mills Pvt Ltd., Represented by its Authorized Signatory M. Samayakaruppasamy v/s The Chairman, Tamil Nadu Generation & Distribution Corporation Limited, Chennai & Others

    W.P.(MD) Nos. 15292, 15294, 15297, 15299, 15305, 15306, 15313, 15319 & 15321 of 2020 & W.M.P(MD) Nos. 12852, 12855 to 12857, 12859, 12860, 12862, 12863, 12867 to 12870, 12874 to 12879 of 2020
    Decided On, 04 November 2020
    At, Before the Madurai Bench of Madras High Court
    By, THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ABDUL QUDDHOSE
    For the Petitioner: N. Sudalaimuthu, Advocate. For the Respondents: Rajeswari, Advocate, S.M.S. Johnny Basha, Standing Counsel.


Judgment Text
(Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records leading to the issuance of impugned High Tension Bill (Provisional) issued by the third respondent for the month of April 2020 (Bill 9094620187052001 dated 04.05.2020) pertaining to Service No.079094620187 and quash the same as arbitrary, illegal and in violation Regulation 6(b) of the Tamil Nadu Electricity Supply Code, 2004, and direct the respondents to raise the monthly bill calculating the Maximum Demand Charges at the rate of 20% as per 6(b) of the Tamil Nadu Electricity Supply Code, 2004, till the extended period of lock down, by the Government of Tamil Nadu and not to levy Power Factor penalty till the lock down is lifted.)Common Order1. Since the issue involved in all these writ petitions are of similar in nature, they are disposed of by this common order.2. Heard Mr.N.Sudalaimuthu, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and Mrs.Rajeswari, learned counsel appearing for the respondents.3. By consent of both sides, these writ petitions are taken up for final disposal at the admission stage itself.4.The issue involved in these writ petitions were the subject matter of batch of writ petitions before the Principal Seat of this Court in W.P.Nos.7678 of 2020 batch. By common order, dated 14.08.2020, in the aforesaid batch of writ petitions, the learned Single Judge at the Principal Seat of this Court has passed a final order, allowing the said writ petitions.5. In accordance with the said common order, some of the petitioners in the said batch of writ petitions have also made payment to the respondents. The respondents also received the payment without prejudice to their rights and contentions. As seen from the proceedings of the respondents dated 07.10.2020, signed by the Chief Financial Controller - Revenue, the second respondent herein, writ appeals have also been preferred, aggrieved by the common order, dated 14.08.2020, passed by the learned Single Judge at the Principal Seat of this Court.6. According to the petitioners, despite the common order, dated 14.08.2020, passed in the batch of writ petitions, the third respondent issued the impugned disconnection notice, dated 13.10.2020, since the petitioners were not a party to the common order, dated 14.08.2020, passed in the batch of writ petitions, involving the similar issue.7. The learned counsel for the petitioners drew the attention of this Court, to the common order, dated 14.08.2020, passed in W.P.Nos.7678 of 2020 batch, by the learned Single Judge at the Principal Seat of this Court as well as the impugned disconnection notice, dated 13.10.2020, issued by the third respondent. This Court has perused the affidavit filed in support of the writ petitions and as submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners, the issue involved in these writ petitions are identical to the issue, which is involved in WP.Nos.7678 of 2020 batch, wherein, final orders were passed by the learned Single Judge at the Principal Seat of this Court, on 14.08.2020, allowing the batch of writ petitions. Therefore, this Court is of the considered view that the petitioners should also have the benefit of the similar order as passed by the learned Single Judge at the Principal Seat of this Court, on 14.08.2020.8. Accordingly, the impugned orders are hereby quashed and the writ petitions are allowed. Since, the writ petitions are allowed, the petitioners are directed to pay the Current Consumption charges after deducting 80% demand charges or recorded demand, whichever is higher and low power factor surcharges relating to the petitioners' bill raised for the bill months from 04/2020 onwards (i.e. for the complete lock down period) within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. It is the further contention of the respective petitioners that in all these writ petitions, the petitioners hav

Please Login To View The Full Judgment!
e paid the entire amount as per the impugned demand. Since the writ petitions are allowed and the petitioners are directed to pay only 20% of the impugned demand, the respondents shall adjust the excess payment, if any, made by the petitioner in the future bills raised by the petitioner.9. Accordingly, the Writ Petitions are Allowed. However, there shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.
O R