← Library
Madras High CourtWP/841/2009disposed of

M/S.Hi-Tech Mineral Industries v. The Tamil Nadu Electricity

2022-03-25Honourable Mr Justice M. Govindaraj3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 25.03.2022

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.GOVINDARAJ W.P.Nos.841 and 842 of 2009 and M.P.No.1 of 2009 M/s.HI-Tech Mineral Industries Covai (P) Ltd., S.F.No.46, Kottagoundenpatty Village, Omalaur Taluk, Salem District - 636 304, Rep. by its Managing Director, P.Venkittapathy. ... Petitioner in both W.Ps. Vs.

1. The Tamil Nadu Electricity Regulatory Commission, 19-A, Rukmani Lakshmipathy Salai, (Marchall's Road), Egmore, Chennai - 600 008.

2. The Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, Rep. by its Chairman, 144, Anna Salai, Chennai - 600 002.

3. The Superintending Engineer, Salem Electricity Distribution Circle, Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, K.N.Colony (P.O), Salem - 626 014. ... Respondents in both W.Ps.

COMMON PRAYER: The Writ Petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Certiorari, to call for the records of the third respondent in Bill Nos.128 and 248, respectively, dated 30.12.2008 and quash that portion of the amounts shown in items 13(a) and 15 namely extra levy for exceeding limits at Rs.7/- and Add/Less Adjustment charges as illegal, arbitrary and against the orders of the first respondent in Miscellaneous Petition No.42 of 2008 dated 28.11.2008.

For Petitioner in both W.Ps.

: No appearance For Respondents in both W.Ps. : M/s.Abdul Kalam C O M M O N O R D E R The petitioner challenges the extra levy of charges for exceeding limits of working hours. According to him, he was granted permission to avail quota of 18 days in a month from 11th to 28th. Though the petitioner has not exceeded the permitted quota, they worked from 7.00 p.m on 29.11.2008 to 8.00 a.m on 30.11.2008 to complete 18 days quota. Therefore, it is the contention of the petitioner that since they have not exceeded the quota, working on one extra day will not entitle the respondent to impose extra levy.

2. The learned counsel for the respondent would submit that the issue with regard to usage of this power within permitted period and with regard to permitted quota will fall under Rule 38 of Tamil Nadu Electricity Distribution Code and the matter has to be agitated before the Regulatory Commission, which is the competent body to try this issue. The petitioner has approached this Court, without exhausting the efficacious remedy available before the Regulatory.

Considering the submissions made, these Writ Petitions are disposed of with a direction to the petitioner to approach the Electricity Regulatory Commission. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed. SD/- ASSISTANT REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SUB ASSISTANT REGISTRAR asi To

1. The Tamil Nadu Electricity Regulatory Commission, 19-A, Rukmani Lakshmipathy Salai, (Marchall's Road), Egmore, Chennai - 600 008.

2. The Chairman, Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, 144, Anna Salai, Chennai - 600 002.

3. The Superintending Engineer, Salem Electricity Distribution Circle, Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, K.N.Colony (P.O), Salem - 626 014.

W.P.Nos.841 and 842 of 2009 and M.P.No.1 of 2009 gpl[co] srg 12/04/2022