Citation : 2022 Latest Caselaw 6547 Tel
Judgement Date : 7 December, 2022
Page 1 of 17
WP No.25520 of 2022
SK,J
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.SARATH
WRIT PETITION No.25520 of 2022
ORDER:-
This writ petition is filed for the following relief:
"....to issue writ order or direction more
particularly one in the nature of Writ of
Mandamus declaring the Assessment Notice
vide Letter
No.ADE/OP/MNGD/F.No./D.No.632/21 dated
20.03.2021 in respect of Munugodu Unit, and
Letter No.ADE/OP/NLGT/F.No./D.No.2055
dt.24.02.2021 in respect of Nalgonda Town-
II Unit, issued by respondent Nos.4 and 5
changing category or private special maintenance shed (SPM) Shed from LT-III Category to LT-II category with effect from 08.04.2015 to 02.03.2021 and from 10.03.2017 to 23.02.2021 respectively, as illegal, arbitrary and violative of principles of natural justice and violative of Article-14 of Constitution of India and consequently set aside the same and also the arrears claimed in the bill pertaining to Munugodu Unit and
WP No.25520 of 2022 SK,J
Nalgonda Town-II Units vide Service Connections Nos.0701402531 - USC No.106039364 dated 03.04.2021; and S.C.No.0201407256: USC No.105386430 dated.08.09.2021 and further to direct the respondents to continue categorization of the petitioner private shed in LT-III itself"
2. Heard Sri Chekuri Yadagiri, learned Counsel
appearing for the petitioner, and Sri R.Vinod Reddy,
learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondents,
3. The learned Counsel for the petitioner submits
that the petitioner-unit is running SPM-Sheds
(Special Maintenance Shed) of the respondents,
carrying out the repairs to the failed 1-Phase and
3-Phase Distributions of Transformers (Conventional &
CSP types) of all capacities available at Munugodu and
Nalgonda Town-II SPM Centers. For the purpose of
maintaining the distribution transformers, the
WP No.25520 of 2022 SK,J
petitioner engaged in manufacturing of H.V. coils and
L.V. coils as per the standards and take up process of
assembling of transformers at work shops. The
petitioner undertakes the works purely Government
rate for maintenance of transformers erected by the
Respondents-Corporation. During the maintenance
activity the petitioner need to change coils as per the
requirements and same involves in manufacturing
H.V. Coils and L.V. Coils with suitable gauge of wire
and provide insulation material and using winding
wire. The petitioner has obtained power supply under
LT-III category i.e. Industrial category and doing the
same work since long time and same is considered as
Industry and the petitioner is not due any amount till
he received impugned assessment notices
dated.20.03.2021 for back billing from 08.04.2015 to
02.03.2021 for an amount of Rs.72,577 /- in respect
WP No.25520 of 2022 SK,J
of Munugodu unit, another Notice dated 24.02.2021
for the period from 10.03.2017 to 23.02.2021 for an
amount of Rs.1,32,548/- in respect of Nalgonda
Town-II changing his service connections from LT-III
category to LT-II category i.e. Commercial Category.
The same was issued on the ground that the
petitioner obtained service connection under wrong
category and observed that the petitioner is utilizing
the supply for transformer repairing center, and the
same is not coming under Industry Category and it
comes under Commercial Category i.e. LT-II Category.
4. The learned Counsel for the petitioner further
submitted that the respondents without issuing any
notice to the petitioner, changed the category from
LT-III category to LT-II category retrospectively and
the same is without any justification and the said
WP No.25520 of 2022 SK,J
action arbitrary, illegal and violation of Electricity Act
and also against the principles of natural justice.
5. The learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted
that after issuing the impugned notice, the petitioner
through their Association viz., Telangana Transformers
Repairing Contractors Association, has submitted their
objections and requested the respondents to waive the
back billing and restore the Category-III, but as on
today the respondents have not taken any decision.
The respondents have no power to issue impugned
assessment notice and without issuing any notice for
change of category from LT-III to LT-II. The petitioner
is carrying its activity in the premises of the
respondents. The respondents high handedly, without
taking into account of the industry's factual position,
issued the impugned notice. As per Clause-3.4.1 of
WP No.25520 of 2022 SK,J
GTCS (General Terms and Conditions of Supply), the
respondents have to issue notice to the consumer for
proposed reclassification and receive objections within
fifteen days from the date of receipt of notice. In the
instant case, the respondents, without following the
same, straight away issued the impugned assessment
notice by changing the category of service connection
of the petitioner from L.T III category to L.T.II category,
unilaterally and the said action of the respondents is
arbitrary, illegal and liable to be set aside.
6. The learned Counsel for the petitioner in support
of his contention, relied upon the judgment of this
Court in Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd.,
Vs. Andhra Pradesh Southern Power Distribution
Company Ltd.,1 and another judgment of Gujarath
2016 (2) ALT 349
WP No.25520 of 2022 SK,J
High Court in Hindustan Petroleum Corporation
Ltd., Vs. Gujarath Electricity Board,2
7. The learned Counsel for the petitioner at the time
of arguments submitted "UDYAM Registration
Certificate" issued by the Ministry of Micro, Small and
Medium Enterprises, Government of India in the name
of "Polamani Krishna", Narayanpet, Narayanpet
District and the activity of the said unit is mentioned
as "Manufacturing Unit" and the same is attested by
the Divisional Engineer, Electrical,
Technical/TSSPDCL, Mahabubnagar. The said
certificate extracted below:
S.No. NIC 2 Digit NIC 4 Digit NIC 5 Digit Activity
1 27 - 2710 - Manufacture 27102 - Manufacturing Manufacture of electric motors, Manufacture of of electrical generators, electric Power equipment transformers and Distribution electricity distribution transformers, arc-
and control welding
Air 2005 Guj.164 (Guj)1-GLR 519
WP No.25520 of 2022
SK,J
apparatus transformers,
fluorescent
ballasts,
transmission and
distribution
voltage regulators
8. The learned Counsel for the petitioner further
submitted that the said Polamani Krishna also filed
another Writ Petition along with the petitioner before
this Court vide W.P.No.25440 of 2022 questioning the
similar notice. In view of the same, the unit of the
petitioner has to be considered as 'Manufacturing Unit'
by the Government of India and the same can be
treated as Industrial Category i.e. LT-III as per TSERC
Tariff Order. The learned Counsel for the petitioner
prayed to set aside the impugned notice and direct the
respondents to consider the unit of the petitioner as
Industry under LT-III Category.
9. Sri R.Vinod Reddy, learned Standing Counsel
appearing for the respondents submit that the
WP No.25520 of 2022 SK,J
petitioner-unit is running a firm, carrying out repairs
of failed 1-Phase and 3-Phase Distribution
Transformers of all capacities issued by the TSSPDCL
within the area of their operation in the SPM sheds
provided to the petitioner and similar persons. As per
the terms and conditions of agreement, on job contract
basis and claims the amount for such repairs from the
TSSPDCL. The petitioner activity is not
manufacturing any goods, and it only carrying out to
repair the failed electric Distribution Transformers
(DTRs) which is a commercial activity and therefore
petitioner's firm has to be billed under LT-II category
i.e. Commercial Category as per the tariff order issued
by the Telangana State Electricity Regulatory
Commission (TSREC). The contention of
manufacturing H.V. and L.V. coils are false and
baseless, for the reason that there is no machinery in
WP No.25520 of 2022 SK,J
the SPM sheds for manufacturing the coils. The
petitioner procures the coils, insulation papers and
others parts from the market and repair the DTRs
issued to them under the Job Contract basis and claim
the bill amount from the TSSPDCL. The activity
carried by the petitioner is commercial/non-industrial
and as such it has to be billed under LT-II Category as
per the tariff applicable tariff orders issued by the
TSERC on year to year basis. As per Clause-3.4.1 of
GTCS the respondents have power to alter the
classification and revise the bills with retrosepctive
effect and carry out assessment for the entire period
during which such reclassification is needed and
requested to dismiss the writ petition.
10. After hearing both sides, this Court is of
considered view that, admittedly the petitioner is
carrying out repairs to failed 1-Phase and 3-Phase
WP No.25520 of 2022 SK,J
Distribution of Transformers (Conventional and CSP
Types) of all capacities and the petitioner stated that
for the purpose of maintaining the distribution
transformers, engaged in manufacturing of H.V. coils
and L.V. coils as per the standards and also taking up
the process of assembling of transformer at work
shops. The petitioner is doing only maintenance of
transformers erected by the respondents-corporation.
The respondents given power supply to the petitioner
under Category-III i.e. Industrial category and doing
the same work since long time in their premises. The
respondents without issuing any notice to the
petitioner straight away reclassified the category and
retrospectively assessed the charges and issued
impugned assessment notice for back-billing from
08.04.2015 to 02.03.2021 (for Munugodu Unit) and
from 10.03.2017 to 23.02.2021 (for Nalgonda-II Unit)
WP No.25520 of 2022 SK,J
basing on the inspections conducted on 02.03.2021
and 23.02.2021 respectively. The respondents not
issued any notice to the petitioner before changing the
category from LT-III to LT-II category. In their counter
also, the respondents not denied with regard to non-
issuance of notice before issuing impugned notices of
back billing for change of category. The same is
contrary to Clause 3.4.1 of GTCS.
The Clause 3.4.1. of GTCS, reads as follows:
Reclassification of consumer Category- 3.4.1 . Where a consumer has been classified under a particular category and is billed accordingly and it is subsequently found that the classification is not correct (subject to the condition that the consumer does not alter the category/ purpose of usage of the premises without prior intimation to the Designated Officer of the Company), the consumer will be informed through a notice, of the proposed reclassification, duly giving him an opportunity to file any objection within a period of 15 days. The
WP No.25520 of 2022 SK,J
Company after due consideration of the consumer's reply if any, may alter the classification and suitably revise the bills if necessary even with retrospective effect, the assessment shall be made for the entire period during which such reclassification is needed, however, the period during which such reclassification is needed cannot be ascertained, such period shall be limited to a period of twelve months immediately preceding the date of inspection"
11. As per the above said clause, the consumer will
be informed through notice of the proposed tariff
reclassification duly giving him opportunity of file
objections, if any, within fifteen days. The respondents
after due consideration of the consumer reply, if any,
may alter the classification and suitably revise the
bills, if necessary, even with retrospective effect, the
assessment shall be made for the their period during
the which such reclassification is needed cannot be
WP No.25520 of 2022 SK,J
ascertained, such period shall be limited to a period of
twelve months immediately after preceding the date of
inspection.
12. In the instant case, the above said procedure is
not followed by the respondents and only basing on
the inspection conducted by the Assist Engineer,
issued the present impugned notice reclassified the
category of the petitioner from LT-III to LT-II/Non-
Domestic/commercial category, and retrospectively
charged with back billing, which clearly shows that the
respondents without following the procedure issued
present impugned notice.
13. The issue raised by the petitioner is that the
petitioner's unit comes under Industry i.e.
Category-LT-III. But in the counter the respondents
have not given any clarification about LT-III Category
and without any basis stating that the petitioners unit
WP No.25520 of 2022 SK,J
does not fall under Category-LT-III as there is no
machinery for manufacturing of coils.
14. The judgments relied by the learned Counsel
for the petitioner in Hindustan Petroleum
Corporation Ltd., Vs. Andhra Pradesh Southern
Power Distribution Company Ltd., (supra 1) and
Hindustan petroleum Corporation Ltd., Vs.
Gujarath Electricity Board (supra 2) apply to the
present case.
15. In Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd., Vs.
A.P.S.P.D.C.L (supra 1), this court concluded that:
"The question whether an activity which does not involved manufacture of goods can still be considered as in industrial activity or not, depends upon the interpretation of the extant statutory provisions/notifications. Going by the language of the tariff order, it is clear that even of no manufacturing activity is undertaken, it is
WP No.25520 of 2022 SK,J
enough if a consumer carries on the activity of processing and/or preserving of goods for sale"
16. In the instant case also the tariff order is issued
for supply, manufacturing, process/or preserving
goods. Moreover, the Government of India also issued
"UDAYAM" Registration Certificate taking into the
activity of the petitioner and similar persons as
"Manufacturing Unit".
17. The respondents, without issuing any notice to
the petitioner for proposed reclassification of category
and not giving him an opportunity to file any objection,
cannot declare that the petitioner is doing commercial
activity and issue notice under back billing by
calculating the charges retrospectively and the same is
contrary to Clause-3.4.1 of GTCS. Moreover, the
Government of India issued certificate that the activity
WP No.25520 of 2022 SK,J
of the petitioner-unit and similarly situated as
Manufacturing Unit. In view of the same the
impugned notices are liable to be set aside.
18. Accordingly, the impugned notices are set aside
and the Writ Petition is allowed. There shall be no
order as to costs.
19. Miscellaneous petitions, pending if any, shall
stand closed.
_____________________ JUSTICE K.SARATH Date:07/12/2022 trr
Publish Your Article
Campus Ambassador
Media Partner
Campus Buzz
LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026
LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!