Madras High Court
M/S.The Tuticorin Spinning Mills ... vs The Superintending Engineer on 17 October, 2023
W.P(MD)No.22362 of 2022
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 17.10.2023
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN
W.P(MD)No.22362 of 2022
M/s.The Tuticorin Spinning Mills Limited,
Represented by its Director,
106, Palayamkottai Road,
Tuticorin District – 628 008. ... Petitioner
Vs.
1.The Superintending Engineer,
TANGEDCO,
Tirunelveli Electricity Distribution Circle,
Tirunelveli.
2.The Chairman and Managing Director,
TANGEDCO,
144, Anna Salai,
Chennai – 02.
3.The Chief Financial Controller / Revenue,
TANGEDCO,
144, Anna Salai,
Chennai – 02. ... Respondents
1/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P(MD)No.22362 of 2022
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 records of the first respondent order in A.No. 975 of 2019 dated
25.04.2019 and quash the same and consequently direct the respondents
to refund the amount of Rs.19,69,645/- recovered from the petitioner
company towards 25% banked units vide audit slips dated 29.07.2015
and 28.01.2016 forthwith along with interest at the rate of 12% monthly
rest till the date of realization.
For Petitioner : Mr.T.Mohan
Senior Advocate
for Mr.S.I.Muthiah
For Respondents : Mr.S.Dheenadhayalan
Standing Counsel
ORDER
Heard the learned Senior Counsel assisted by the learned counsel
appearing for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel appearing
for the respondents.
2.The writ petitioner had established wind mills and was wheeling
the power generated for its own consumption. On account of the
imposition of restriction and control measures by TANGEDCO, the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P(MD)No.22362 of 2022
petitioner could not fully utilise the generated wind energy. The
petitioner was entitled to take advantage of the order passed by TNERC
vide tariff order dated 20.03.2009 permitting encashment of the banked
energy @ 75% of the value during the normal period and @ 100% of the
value when restriction and control (R&C) measures were in force.
3.It is not in dispute that restriction and control (R&C) measures
were in force from 01.11.2008 to 04.06.2015. The petitioner shut down
its operations in the year 2016. The petitioner also wanted to sell their
wind mills. But then, as a precondition, they had to obtain “No Dues
Certificate” from TANGEDCO. When the petitioner approached
TANGEDCO for issuance of such “No Due Certificate”, TANGEDCO
insisted that the petitioner should pay 25% of the banked energy
encashment. Such a demand was made by TANGEDCO based on certain
audit objections and the circular dated 30.05.2015 issued by the Chief
Financial Controller / Revenue, TANGEDCO. According to the
petitioner, this amount was paid under coercive circumstances.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P(MD)No.22362 of 2022
4. The petitioner therefore demanded refund of 25% of the bank
energy encashment. Their request was rejected. Challenging the same,
the present writ petition came to be filed.
5. When the matter was taken up for hearing, certain subsequent
developments were brought to my notice. The issue is no longer res
integra. Vide order dated 27.04.2023 in W.P(MD)No.17091 of 2015 etc
batch (Tamil Nadu Spinning Mills Association Vs The Tamil Nadu
Generation and Distribution Corporation Limited & Others), a learned
Judge of this Court had held as follows:
“15. In the light of the aforesaid reasonings and
findings, I am of the view that the impugned letter dated
30-05-2015 is wholly without any authority much less
arbitrary and hence illegal. In view of the aforesaid
conclusion the consequential demand notices issued to
the petitioners are also liable to be interfered with.
16. In fine the Writ Petitions are allowed, the
impugned order dated 30-05-2015 is quashed and the
consequential demand notices are also set aside.”
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P(MD)No.22362 of 2022
Giving effect to the said judgment, the Chief Financial Controller /
Revenue, TANGEDCO had issued circular vide Letter No.
CFC/REV/FC/REV/AS.3/REV/D.No.553/23 dated 17.06.2023 directing
refund. Therefore, the prayer in the writ petition has to be necessarily
conceded.
6.The learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner points
out that since the petitioner was made to unlawfully part with the
amount, the refund has to necessarily carry interest.
7. I endorse the said contention. The respondents are directed to
refund the petition-mentioned amount to the petitioner within a period of
eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order with 6% p.a
interest from the date of payment by the petitioner till date of refund.
8.This writ petition is allowed on these terms. There shall be no
order as to costs.
17.10.2023
NCC : Yes/No
Index : Yes / No
Internet : Yes/ No
MGA
Note: Issue order copy on 20.10.2023.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P(MD)No.22362 of 2022
G.R.SWAMINATHAN, J.
MGA
To
1.The Superintending Engineer,
TANGEDCO,
Tirunelveli Electricity Distribution Circle,
Tirunelveli.
2.The Chairman and Managing Director,
TANGEDCO,
144, Anna Salai,
Chennai – 02.
3.The Chief Financial Controller / Revenue,
TANGEDCO,
144, Anna Salai,
Chennai – 02.
W.P(MD)No.22362 of 2022
17.10.2023
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
