← Library
Madras High CourtWP/13718/2011disposed of with direction

M/S.Southern Petrochemical v. The Tamilnadu Generation And

2025-10-24Honourable Mr Justice M.Dhandapani6 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 24.10.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI W.P.Nos.13718 of 2011 M/s.Southern Petrochemical Industries Corporation Limited Pharma Division, SIPCOT Industrial Complex, Cuddalore.

: Petitioner Vs.

1.The Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation Limited (TANGEDCO), Represented by its Chairman, No.144, Anna Salai, Chennai-600 002.

2.The Superintending Engineer, TANGEDCO, Cuddalore Electricity Distribution Circle, Cuddalore.

3.The Accounts Officer, Revenue, Cuddalore Electricity Distribution Circle, Cuddalore.

: Respondents 1/6

PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records of the second respondent herein relating to the proceedings, viz (I) letter under Ref.SE/CEDC/Cud/DFC/AO/RCS/ASA4/F.HT.Audit/D/2010 dated 22.2.2011 (ii) letter under Ref.SE/CEDC/Cud/DFC/AO/R/AS/RCS/A4/F.Audi/10 dated 27.04.2011 and (iii) letter under Ref.SE/CEDC/Cud/DFC/AO/RCS/ASA4/F.HT.Audit/D/2010 dated 22.02.2011 and the Bill dated 31.05.2011 and quash the same insofar as it relates to the demand of Rs.15,70,049/- Rs.12,09,600/- and Rs.14,40,522/- in all amounting to Rs.42,20,171/- and consequently direct the second respondent herein to forthwith refund the excess Current Consumption Deposit of Rs.59,60,679/- available with the Board under HTSC No.85 of the petitioner company and pass orders. For Petitioner :M/s.AL.Gandhimathi Senior Counsel for Mr.L.Palanimuthu For Respondents :Mr.Venkata Seshaiya

ORDER

The writ petition is filed to call for the records of the second respondent relating to the proceedings, viz (i) letter under Ref.SE/CEDC/Cud/DFC/AO/RCS/ASA4/F.HT.Audit/D/2010 dated 22.2.2011 (ii) letter under Ref.SE/CEDC/Cud/DFC/AO/R/AS/RCS/A4/F.Audi/10 dated 27.04.2011 and (iii) letter under 2/6

Ref.SE/CEDC/Cud/DFC/AO/RCS/ASA4/F.HT.Audit/D/2010 dated 22.02.2011 and the Bill dated 31.05.2011, and quash the same insofar as it relates to the demand of Rs.15,70,049/- Rs.12,09,600/- and Rs.14,40,522/-, in all amounting to Rs.42,20,171/-, and consequently direct the second respondent to forthwith refund the excess Current Consumption Deposit of Rs.59,60,679/- available with the Board under HTSC No.85 of the petitioner company.

2. The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner has been enjoying High Tension Service connection in HTSC No.85 and Tamil Nadu Electricity Board under Industrial Tariff namely HT1A. The petitioner has been carrying on manufacturing activity in Pharma related products and is also carrying on research and development activity. It is further case of the petitioner that on account of certain maintenance activity, there was temporary stoppage of the production output in the petitioner's pharmaceutical unit, resulting in reduction in the number of electrical units consumed during June, 2009, July 2009 and August 2009, and thereby respondents issued three demand notices to the petitioner and the same were adjusted towards Current Consumption Deposit, without issuing any show cause notice to the petitioner and conducting any enquiry. Hence, this writ petition has been filed.

3/6

3. Though the writ petition has been filed in the year 2011, however, the respondents have not filed counter affidavit till date.

4. Even on a perusal of the impugned order, it is revealed that on the basis of the audit objection, the present demand was made as against the petitioner. Even if there was audit objection, duty is cast upon the respondent electricity board to issue show cause notice and conduct an enquiry and thereafter, demand could have raised. However, without conducting enquiry, straightaway demand has been made, which according to the petitioner is unsustainable.

5. This Court is in agreement with the contention put-forth by the petitioner. Therefore, the impugned orders are set aside and the matter is remanded back to the respondent electricity board for fresh consideration. It is made clear that setting aside the impugned orders does not mean that the respondents have to refund the CCD deposit. The CCD deposit which was available with the respondents shall be kept intact till a decision is taken by the respondents. The above exercise shall be completed within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of 4/6

this order.

5. The writ petitions stands disposed of with the above directions. No. costs. Consequently MP Nos.1 and 2 of 2011 are closed. 24.10.2025 Speaking (or) Non Speaking Order mrn To 1.The Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation Limited (TANGEDCO), Represented by its Chairman, No.144, Anna Salai, Chennai-600 002.

2.The Superintending Engineer, TANGEDCO, Cuddalore Electricity Distribution Circle, Cuddalore.

3.The Accounts Officer, Revenue, Cuddalore Electricity Distribution Circle, Cuddalore.

5/6

M.DHANDAPANI , J.

(mrn) 24.10.2025 6/6