Madras High Court
M/S.Sangu Chakra Hotels Pvt. vs The Accounts Officer/Revenue on 5 October, 2021
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 05.10.2021
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY
W.P(MD).Nos.17941, 17942, 17943, 17198, 17188 and 15451 of 2021
and
W.M.P.(MD)Nos.14804, 14808, 14807, 14075,
14760, 12349 and 12350 of 2021
W.P.(MD)No.17941 of 2021
M/s.Sangu Chakra Hotels Pvt., Ltd.,
Rep. by its Executive Director,
No.168, Alagar Koil Salai,
Athikulam, Madurai 625 002. ... Petitioner
Vs.
1.The Accounts Officer/Revenue,
High Tension Bill Section,
Metro Electricity Distribution Circle,
Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation Ltd.,
Madurai Metro, Madurai-625 007.
2.The Superintending Engineer,
Metro Electricity Distribution Circle,
K.pudhur,
Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation Ltd.,
Madurai-625 007.
3.The Executive Engineer,
Metro Electricity Distribution Circle,
K.pudhur, Madurai Metro,
Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation Ltd.,
Madurai-625 007.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
1/8
4.The Assistant Executive Engineer,
Metro Electricity Distribution Circle, K.K.Nagar,
Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation Ltd.,
Madurai-625 007. ...Respondents
Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India,
praying this Court to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the
entire records of the respondents which culminated in High Tension Bill for the
month of April 2020 in Bill No.9094630024052001 dated 03.05.2020, High
Tension Bill for the month of May 2020 in Bill No.9094630024062001 dated
03.06.2020, High Tension Bill for the month of June 2020 in Bill No.
9094630024072002 dated 05.07.2020, High Tension Bill for the month of July
2020 in Bill No. 9094630024082002 dated 05.08.2020, High Tension Bill for
the month of April 2021 in Bill No.H4630024042111 dated 04.05.2021, High
Tension Bill for the month of May 2021 in Bill No.H4630024052111 dated
04.06.2021 and High Tension Bill for the month of June, 2021 in Bill No.
H4630024062111 dated 05.07.2021 for Service Connection No.059094630024
issued by the first respondent and quash the same in the light of the orders
passed by this Court in batch of W.P.No.7678 of 2020 etc., dated 14.08.2020
and consequently direct the respondents to adjust the amount already paid by
the petitioner in the future bills starting from the month of October 2021
onwards.
For Petitioner : Mr.Muthumani Doraisami
(In all Petitions)
For Respondents : Mrs.M.Rajeswari
(In all Petitions) for Mr.S.M.S.Johnny Basha
Standing Counsel
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
COMMON ORDER
All these writ petitions relate to HT bills in respect of specific months in
2020 and 2021.
2.The respective petitioner states that the TANGEDCO has raised HT
bills even during the lock down period making a demand for demand charges as
well as compensation charges towards low PF. In this regard, the respective
petitioner relies upon the order passed by this Court in a batch of writ petitions,
in which the lead petition is W.P.No.7678 of 2020. The respective petitioner
draws the attention of the Court to the said order dated 14.08.2020 and it is
pointed out that the said order was a detailed order which took into
consideration all material facts, including proceedings of the TNERC and
appellate proceedings before the APTEL. Upon such detailed discussion and
analysis, it is pointed out that directions were issued in paragraph 45 of the said
order. The respective petitioner states that all these writ petitions are covered by
the said order and, therefore, the respective petitioner prays that orders be
issued in terms of the said order.
3.On the contrary, TANGEDCO submits that the said order only pertains
to the lock down occasioned by the first wave of the Covid-19 pandemic in the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
year 2020. Therefore, it is submitted that such order should not be applied in
respect of the lock down occasioned by the second wave of the pandemic in
2021. The second submission on behalf of TANGEDCO is that the order of the
TNERC pursuant to the lock down during the first wave was carried in appeal
before the APTEL. The APTEL granted an interim order whereby the order of
the TNERC was stayed and proceedings before the APTEL are pending. The
third contention of TANGEDCO is that Regulation 6(b) is not applicable as
regards some months during which the relevant petitioner is claiming relief
because there was no lock down during the said month. The fourth contention
of TANGEDCO is that the consumption by some of the petitioners exceeded
the 20% specified in Regulation 6(b) of the Electricity Supply Code. For all
these reasons, TANGEDCO submits that the relief prayed for should not be
granted.
4.Without doubt, the order dated 14.08.2020 of this Court in the batch of
cases of which the lead case is W.P.No.7678 of 2020 was issued in respect of
the lock down during the first wave of the Covid-19 pandemic. However, the
principle on the basis of which the said judgment was rendered would apply
equally to the second wave of the pandemic provided such second wave
resulted in a lock down during the relevant months. In fact, this aspect is also
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
taken care of by the said order in paragraph 45(a). Such paragraph makes it
clear that a revised bill should be issued to the respective petitioner by applying
Regulation 6(b) of the Supply Code for the entire period when the
establishment was shut down. Therefore, the apprehension of TANGEDCO on
such count is misplaced.
5.With regard to the pending proceedings before the APTEL, as correctly
pointed out by learned counsel for the respective petitioner, the order of APTEL
was issued in May 2020, whereas the order of this Court was in August 2020.
Therefore, this Court took into account the proceedings before TNERC and
APTEL before issuing the order. Consequently, the contention of TANGEDCO
on such basis cannot be accepted. The contention of TANGEDCO that the
consumption exceeded 20% is also taken care of by Regulation 6(b) which
provides that “the Licensee may recover from the consumer minimum charges
at 20% of the billable demand or recorded demand whichever is higher besides
charges for the actual consumption of electricity”. It is a different matter that
TANGEDCO may still be able to maintain that there was no lock down at all
during a relevant month and that, therefore, Regulation 6(b) is not applicable in
respect of such month. As stated above, the said contingency is also provided
for in the order dated 14.08.2020. It is brought to the notice of the Court that
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
appeals have been filed in respect of the order dated 14.08.2020 by the
TANGEDCO and that the said appeals are pending before the Hon'ble Division
Bench. Therefore, this order would also abide by the decision of the Hon'ble
Division Bench, inasmuch as the order dated 14.08.2020 has been followed
herein.
6.Therefore, keeping in mind the fact that a detailed order was issued by
this Court on 14.08.2020 in W.P.No.7678 of 2020 and related cases and such
order was the basis of several subsequent orders, I see no reason to depart from
the view taken therein.
7.Accordingly, all these writ petitions are disposed of in terms of the
directions issued in paragraph 45 of the order dated 14.08.2020 in W.P.No.7678
of 2020 and related cases subject to the observations in paragraphs 4 and 5 of
this order. There will no order as to costs. Consequently, W.M.P.(MD)Nos.
14804, 14808, 14807, 14075, 14760, 12349 and 12350 of 2021 are closed.
05.10.2021
Index : Yes / No
Internet : Yes/ No
sn/sji
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Note : In view of the present lock down owing to COVID-19
pandemic, a web copy of the order may be utilized for official
purposes, but, ensuring that the copy of the order that is
presented is the correct copy, shall be the responsibility of the
advocate/litigant concerned.
To
The Accounts Officer/Revenue,
High Tension Bill Section,
Metro Electricity Distribution Circle,
Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation Ltd.,
Madurai Metro, Madurai-625 007.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY, J.
sn/sji
W.P(MD).Nos.17941, 17942, 17943, 17198,
17188 and 15451 of 2021
and
W.M.P.(MD)Nos.14804, 14808, 14807,
14075, 14760, 12349 and 12350 of 2021
05.10.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
