Sanmar Ferrotech Ltd., Ht. v. Tamilnadu Generation

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED :04.07.2018

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM W.P.No.14325 of 2013 and M.P.Nos.1 & 2 of 2013 Sanmar Ferrotech Ltd., HTSCNo.1865 K-4, Sipcot Phase II, Gummidipoondi Thiruvallur District rep.

By its Authorised Signature N.S,Srinvasan .. Petitioner vs 1.Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation Limited Rep. By its Chairman and Managing Director NP.K.K.R.Maaligai, 144, Anna Salai, Chennai - 600 002.

2.The Superintendent Engineer Chennai Electricity Distribution Circle (North) 791, Anna Salai, Chennai - 600 002.

3.Tamil Nadu Electricity Regulatory Commission Rep. By its Secretary, 19A, Rukmini Lakshmipathy Salai, Chennai - 600 008.

4.State Industries Promotion Corporation of Tamil Nadu Limited Rep. By its Chairman 19A, Rukmini Lakshmipathy Salai, Chennai - 600 008.

.. Respondents Prayer:

Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Certiorari calling for the records comprised in Letter SE/D 5673/2013 dated 19.04.2013 issued by the second respondent and quash the same as being contradictory to the provisions of the Electricity Act 2003 and Tail Nadu Electricity Supply Code, 2004 and Tamil Nadu Electricity Distribution Code, 2004.

For Petitioner : Mr.R.S.Pandiyaraj For Respondents : Mr.P.R.Dhilipkumar 1 to 3 Government Advocate For Respondent 3 : Mr.Ramesh Venkadachalapathy

O R D E R

The relief sought for in this writ petition is to call for the records comprised in Letter SE/D 5673/2013 dated 19.04.2013 issued by the second respondent and quash the same as being contradictory to the provisions of the Electricity Act 2003 and Tail Nadu Electricity Supply Code, 2004 and Tamil Nadu Electricity Distribution Code, 2004.

2. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the writ petitioner, made a submission that the issues raised in this writ petition are already decided by this Court in Batch of writ petitions in W.P.Nos.15238 of 2012 etc., on 23.07.2013. The relevant paragraph Nos.45, 46, and 47 of the said Judgment are extracted hereunder:

"45.Since the Regulation 5 (5) (vii) (a) of the Tamil Nadu Electricity Supply Code, 2004 does not apply to HT Consumers who are the owners of premises, namely, building or structure, despite the fact that the land developed by SIPCOT is parted by way of 99 years lease, the question of challenging the said regulation does not arise. Therefore, the objection raised by the respondent electricity Board on this issue is rejected.

46. In view of the above, the respondent Electricity Board is not entitled to demand additional current consumption deposit in terms of amended Regulation 5 (5) (vii) (a) from the HT industries who are owners of the premises, namely, building or structure put up on the plots developed by SIPCOT and leased out to the petitioners on a 99 years lease with a further clause for renewal for a further period of 99 years. The amended regulation does not apply to the petitioners. However, as already pointed out wherever the building or structure is leased or parted to a different person by the owner the amended Regulation as above

will be attracted automatically.

The respondent Electricity Board is entitled to proceed as per law against the occupier or lessee. Insofar as HT industries, the petitioners herein, who are actual owners of the premises, namely, building or structure are concerned and covered by lease agreement for a period of 99 years executed by the SIPCOT, the impugned demands in terms of amended Regulation 5 (5) (vii) (a) of the Tamil Nadu Electricity Supply Code, 2004 will not be applicable. The petitioners, however, are liable to pay additional current consumption deposit as per the earlier provision, namely, Regulation 5 (5) (ii) (a) of the Tamil Nadu Electricity Supply Code, 2004.

47. Petitioners in all these cases are directed to pay the additional Current Consumption Deposit as per Regulation 5 (5) (ii) (a) of the Tamil Nadu Electricity Supply Code, 2004 forthwith. The respondent Board is directed to adjust the excess deposit, if any, towards monthly current consumption charges, which, as rightly pointed out by the learned counsel for the respondent Board, is stated in para 11 of the counter. The respondent Board is entitled to adjust the excess amount in deposit under Regulation 5 (5) (v) of the Tamil Nadu Electricity Supply Code. The writ petitions are allowed as above.

Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed."

The writ petitioner is also to be considered in light of the order cited supra.

3. Accordingly, the writ petition stands disposed of. However, there shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS-VI) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar

nmm/stm To 1.The Chairman and Managing Director Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation Limited NP.K.K.R.Maaligai, 144, Anna Salai, Chennai - 600 002.

2.The Superintendent Engineer Chennai Electricity Distribution Circle (North) 791, Anna Salai, Chennai - 600 002.

3.The Secretary, Tamil Nadu Electricity Regulatory Commission 19A, Rukmini Lakshmipathy Salai, Chennai - 600 008.

4.The Chairman State Industries Promotion Corporation of Tamil Nadu Limited 19A, Rukmini Lakshmipathy Salai, Chennai - 600 008.

+1cc to Mr.RAMESH VENKATACHALAPATHY, Advocate, S.R.No.43441 W.P.No.14325of 2013 and M.P.Nos.1 & 2 of 2013 SSV(CO) TR(18/07/2018)