Madras High CourtWP/31195/2013disposed of

M/S.Indus Towers Ltd., v. The Executive Engineer

2022-03-17Honourable Mr Justice K. Kalyanasundaram3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED :17.03.2022

CORAM:

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE K.KALYANASUNDARAM W.P.No.31195 of 2013 and M.P.No.1 of 2013 M/s.INDUS TOWERS LTD, Represented by its Manager - Legal, NP5, Jawaharlal Nehru Road, ESPEE IT Park, 5th Floor, Ekkattuthangal, Chennai 600032.

...Petitioner

Vs.

1. The Executive Engineer, (Operation and Maintenance), Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation Ltd., (TANGEDCO Limited), Tambaram, Chennai 600045.

2. The Assistant Executive Engineer, (Operation and Maintenance), Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation Ltd., (TANGEDCO Limited), Chennai Electricity Distribution Circle, Chennai South, Keezhkatalai, Chennai 600045.

3. The Assistant Engineer, (Operation and Maintenance), Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation Ltd., (TANGEDCO Limited), Chennai Electricity Distribution Circle, Chennai South, Keezhkatalai, Chennai 600045.

4. The Assistant Engineer, (Operation and Maintenance), Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation Ltd., (TANGEDCO Limited), Chennai Electricity Distribution Circle, Chennai South, Kovilambakkam, Chennai.

...Respondents

Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents herein to immediately restore electricity to the petitioner at No.404, 200 Feet Road, Echangadu, Kovilambakkam, Chennai, in S.C.No.09316008552 (Old S.C.No.092592683170) forthwith on payment of the current consumption charges for the relevant period without imposing any penalty.

For Petitioner : Mr.Imayavaramban For Respondents : Mr.L.Jai Venkatesh

ORDER

This writ petition has been filed for issuance of writ of mandamus, directing the respondents to immediately restore the service connection to the petitioner.

2.The case of the petitioner is that the 4th respondent had provided electricity service connection to the petitioner and subsequently it was transferred to 3rd respondent. 3.The grievance of the petitioner is that the 4th respondent as well as the 3rd respondent, simultaneously demanding payment from the petitioner and the reply submitted by the petitioner was also not properly considered.

4.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would state that when the writ petition is listed for admission, the petitioner was directed to pay Rs.9 lakhs for restoration of the electricity service connection and after making such payment, electricity service connection to the petitioner was also restored. The petitioner is ready to pay a reasonable amount to the electricity board. But no opportunity was given to them. 5.The learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents referring to the counter and additional counter filed by the respondents, denied the allegation of double billing made by the respondents 3 and 4.

6.However, considering the facts and circumstances of this case, the 3rd respondent is directed to provide opportunity to the petitioner and shall pass orders afresh. The fact that the electricity service connection was already restored to the petitioner can also be taken note of, while considering the grievance of the petitioner.

7.With the above observation, this writ petition stands disposed of. No costs. Consequently connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS-IV) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar Jer To

1. The Executive Engineer, (Operation and Maintenance), Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation Ltd., (TANGEDCO Limited), Tambaram, Chennai 600045.

+1cc to Mr.L.Jaivenkatesh, Advocate, S.R.No.18251 W.P.No.31195 of 2013 PL(CO) SB(21/04/2022)