M.Murugan v. The Additional Chief

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 03.12.2025

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.VIJAYAKUMAR W.P(MD)Nos.8967 and 11614 of 2018 and W.M.P(MD) Nos.8377, 10581 and 10582 of 2018 M.Murugan

...Petitioner

(in both petitions) Vs

1. The Additional Chief Engineer (Metro) TANGEDCO, Office of the Superintendent of Engineer, Madurai.

2. The Executive Engineer (APTS) TANGEDCO Office of the Superintendent of Engineer, Madurai.

3. The Assistant Executive Engineer, (O&U) TANGEDCO Office of the Superintending of Engineer, Thirumangalam, Madurai.

4. The Assistant Engineer (O &M) TANGEDCO Office of the Superintending of Engineer, Thirumangalam, Madurai.

... Respondents (in both petitions) 1/7

PRAYER in W.P(MD) No.8967 of 2018: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Certiorari, calling for the records pertaining to the impugned order passed by the fourth respondent vide his proceedings in Ka.No.Vu.Mi.Po/Pa/ Merkkupirivu/Thiru/Ko.Mathi/A.No.018/18, dated 16.04.2018 and quash the same.

PRAYER in W.P(MD) No.11614 of 2018: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Certiorari, calling for the records pertaining to the impugned order passed by the fourth respondent vide his proceedings in Ka.No.Vu.Mi.Po/May/Thiruma/ Va.Aa/Ko.Thani/A.No.040/18, dated 18.05.2018 and quash the same. In both petitions:

For Petitioner : Mr.D.Senthil For Respondents : Mr.S.Deenadhayalan Standing Counsel C O M M ON O R D E R The petitioner has availed HT Service connection in Service Number is 05-138-007-299 from the year 2012 for running Water Plant. The petitioner has received a consumption bill dated 28.09.2017 wherein a sum of Rs. 3,09,057/- was demanded by the Electricity Board. 2/7

2. According to the petitioner, the condition of the meter was not in good condition and therefore he filed W.P.(MD)No.21519 of 2017 seeking a Mandamus, directing the Electricity Board officials for conducting the enquiry regarding the condition of the meter and in the meantime his electricity connection was disconnected, when the writ petition was pending. The authorities have issued an order dated 13.11.2017 contending that the meter is in good condition. This order was put to challenge in W.P(MD) No.22236 of 2017. Both the writ petitions were tagged together and a common order came to be passed on 07.02.2017.

3. As per the common order passed by this Court, the petitioner was directed to pay 30% of the total dues and upon such payment, the respondents were directed to resume the electricity connection forthwith. Without going to the merits of the petitioner's claim this Court has also directed the respondents, to consider the claim of the petitioner to test the meter, on payment of necessary charges by the petitioner.

4. Pursuant to the orders of this Court, the petitioner has paid appropriate charges for testing the Meter. The Meter was tested by a third 3/7

party and reported that the Meter is in good condition. The said report was also communicated to the writ petitioner. Thereafter, the authorities have issued proceedings on 16.04.2018 demanding the balance amount on 18.05.2018 through another impugned order which came to be passed directing the writ petitioner to pay the balance amount based upon the testing report. These two orders are put to challenge in the present writ petitions.

5. According to the learned counsel appearing for the writ petitioner, even in such circumstances electricity bill for the month of August and September exceeds 75%. However, erroneously more than Rs.3,00,000/- was remitted during the month of September 2017 and testing has not been conducted in a proper manner.

6. Per contra, the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents submitted that the test report is not in favour of the writ petitioner and therefore the petitioner has to comply with the demand made by the Electricity Board.

7. Heard both sides.

4/7

8. Pursuant to the orders of this Court in W.P(MD) No.21519 of 2017 and W.P(MD) No.22236 of 2017 order dated 07.12.2017, a third party has conducted testing of meter and found that the meter is in good condition. In such circumstances, the petitioner has to pay the amount as demanded by the Electricity Board. In case, if there are any errors in the test report it is for him to workout his remedy before the Electricity Board.

9. With the above said observations, these Writ Petitions stand disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently connected Miscellaneous petitions are closed.

03.12.2025 NCC : Yes/No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No ebsi 5/7

To

1. The Additional Chief Engineer (Metro) TANGEDCO, Office of the Superintendent of Engineer, Madurai.

2. The Executive Engineer (APTS) TANGEDCO Office of the Superintendent of Engineer, Madurai.

3. The Assistant Executive Engineer, (O&U) TANGEDCO Office of the Superintending of Engineer, Thirumangalam, Madurai.

4. The Assistant Engineer (O &M) TANGEDCO Office of the Superintending of Engineer, Thirumangalam, Madurai.

6/7

R.VIJAYAKUMAR,J.

ebsi W.P(MD)Nos.8967 and 11614 of 2018 03.12.2025 7/7