Madras High CourtWP(MD)/8937/2010allowed

Vims Impex Limited v. Tamil Nadu Electricity

2020-12-08Honourable Mr Justice Abdul Quddhose2 pages

W.P.(MD)No.8937 of 2010 and BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 08.12.2020

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ABDUL QUDDHOSE W.P.(MD)No.8937 of 2010 and M.P.(MD)Nos.1 of 2010 and 1 of 2013 Vims Impex Limited, HT SC No.32 (DEDC, TNEB), Soundarya Nagar, Seelapadi Village, Dindigul -624 005, represented by its Manager, G.Saravanan.

: Petitioner Vs.

1.Tamil Nadu Electricity Regulatory Commission, represented by its Secretary, 19-A, Rukmani Lakshmipathy Salai, (Marshal Road), Egmore, Chennai - 600 008.

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

3.The Superintending Engineer, Dindigul Electricity Distribution Circle, Dindigul.

: Respondents PRAYER:- Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records of the third respondent in letter No.SE/DEDC/DGL/AO/Rev/CO/DGL/D.No.1770, dated 05.07.2010 and quash the same insofar as it relates to levy of penalty for exceeding quota during evening peak hour as illegal, arbitrary without authority of law and against the orders of the first respondent made in optimum demand concept as per clause I (n) of Circular Memo dated 01.11.2008 and consequently, to direct the third respondent to refund or give adjustment of Rs.73,110/-, already collected illegally in their subsequent month bills.

For Petitioner :Mr.R.S.Pandiyaraj For Respondents :Mr.S.M.S.Johnny Basha **** https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 1/2

W.P.(MD)No.8937 of 2010 and

ORDER

(This petition was heard through the Video Conferencing) This Writ Petition has been filed challenging the letter, dated 05.07.2010 issued by the third respondent, whereby, the petitioner's request to run their industry without interruption of any power supply, since their industry is a continuous process industry, was rejected by the respondents.

2.Heard Mr.R.S.Pandiyaraj, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Mr.S.M.S.Johnny Basha, learned Counsel for the respondents. 3.The learned Standing Counsel for the respondents, on instructions, would fairly concede that the petitioner's industry comes within the category of a continuos process industry, as it falls in serial No.16(Malt-Extract), as per the circular of the Tamil Nadu Electricity Board in Memo No.CE/Comml/EE/DSM/F.Power Cut/D.001/2008, dated 01.11.2008, 4.Since the petitioner's industry falls under the category of "continuos process industry", this Court is of the considered view that the impugned order has been passed by total non application of mind and is arbitrary and illegal.

5.For the forgoing reasons, the impugned order passed by the third respondent, dated 05.07.2010, is hereby quashed and the Writ Petition is allowed. No costs.

Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar (Records) // True Copy // / /2020 Sub Assistant Registrar(CS) cmr Order made in W.P.(MD)No.8937 of 2010 08.12.2020 ARK(CO) NR (21/12/2020) 2P : 1C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2/2