Back
2012 Supreme(Mad) 3853
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
V. Dhanapalan, J.
Triveni Alloys Ltd., Gummidipoondi, rep. by its Manager, N.K. Ganesh
Versus
Chairman, Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, Chennai and Others
W.P. No. 15791 of 2012
Decided On : 14 September 2012
K. Seshadri, for Petitioner G. Vasudevan and Ms. Narmada Sampath, for Respondents
Headnote:Tamil Nadu Electricity Supply Code, 2004, Regulation 5(5)(vii)(a) – The suit is regarding the demand for additional current consumption deposit, in which the petitioner is a high tension industry, who is asked to pay additional amount for additional current consumption who were treated as tenant/lessee – In the writ petition challenged the regulations are only applicable to the consumers who were not the owners of the premises – Therefore, the Respondents were not entitled for demanding additional current consumption Deposit in terms of amended Regulations 5(5)(vii)(a) from the HT industry, who is the owner of the premises and which executed the lease to the petitioner for a period of 99 years – Regardless, the amended regulation did not apply to the petitioner – Thus, petitioner was the actual owner of the premises, namely, building or structure and was covered by the lease period of 99 years – And the challenged demand in term of amended Regulation 5(5)(vii)(a) of the Tamil Nadu Electricity Supply Code, 2004 would not be applicable – Hence, the petitioner is liable to pay for the extra current consumption deposit as per the earlier Regulation 5(5)(ii)(a) of the Tamil Nadu Electricity Supply Code – Allowing the writ petition.
1. By consent of the learned counsel on either side, this writ petition is taken up for final disposal.
2. This writ petition is filed challenging the impugned demand issued by the 2nd respondent in Lr. No. SE/CEDC/N/AAO/HT/ 1737/D2076/2012, dated 11.6.2012 to the petitioner in H.T.Sc.N.1737 and quash the same as illegal, arbitrary and against the Regulation 5(5)(ii)(a) of the Tamil Nadu Electricity Supply Code, 2004 and consequently direct the 2nd respondent to adjust and refund, as contemplated under Regulation 5(5)(v) of Supply Code, 2004.
3. Facts of the case as put forth in the affidavit would run thus:
3.1. The petitioner industry is involved in the manufacture of Steel Rods etc. having High Tension Service Connection in H.T.S.C. No. 1737, which comes under the jurisdiction of the 2nd respondent. The said industry is located in the layout promoted by the State Industries Promotion Corporation of Tamil Nadu Limited (SIPCOT), the 3rd respondent herein and let out for a period of 99 years on and from 29.8.1989 to develop the industries in the State of Tamil Nadu.
3.2. The petitioner industry applied for electricity supply with all relevant documents and entered into an agreement with the respondents’ Board for getting electricity connection. The High Tension Industry at the time of submitting application for supply of energy has to pay Earnest Money Deposit (EMD) at the rate of Rs. 800/- per K.V.A. along with Registration fee, subsequently the EMD will be adjusted against the quantum of initial Security Deposit or Current Consumption Deposit, payable by the applicant before availing the supply and the balance amount, if any required will be collected from the HT applicant.
3.3. The 2nd respondent is also reviewing the adequacy of Security Deposit available once in a year in the month of April/May as per Regulation 5.5(ii)(a) of the Tamil Nadu Electricity Supply Code, 2004 framed by the Tamil Nadu Electricity Regulatory Commission. As per the above condition, the average of the current consumption charges for the preceding 12 months prior to the month of April of that year will be arrived at and a sum equivalent to two times this average will be calculated. The higher of the two viz., the calculated amount and the initial Current Consumption Deposit held will be the revised Current Consumption Deposit. If the available deposit is less than the revised Current Consumption Deposit, the balance will be collected as additional Current Consumption Deposit under Regulation 5(5)(IV) of the Code.
3.4. The petitioner has paid a sum of Rs. 31,20,000/- towards the Current Consumption Deposit for H.T.S.C. No. 1737 for getting supply from the 2nd respondent. As on date, a sum of Rs. 1,45,29,469/- is available to the petitioner’s credit towards Security Deposit.
3.5. The 2nd respondent in the impugned Demand Notice vide Lr. No. SE/CEDC/N/AAO/HT/1737/D2076/2012 dated 11.6.2012 has claimed a sum of Rs. 1,37,51,331/- towards Additional Current Consumption Deposit (ACCD) over and above the existing Current Consumption Deposit of Rs. 1,45,29,469/- held by the petitioner under Regulation 5(5)(iv) of the Tamil Nadu Electricity Supply Code, 2004 treating as Lessee of the land let out for a period of 99 years by the 3rd respondent.
3.6. As per the said Regulation, the total consumption charges paid as per the statement issued by the 2nd respondent is Rs. 8,48,42,402/-. The monthly average of the amount comes to Rs. 70,70,200/- and hence, under Regulation 5(5)(ii)(a), two times of the said amount would be Rs. 1,41,40,400/- which is less than the existing Current Consumption Deposit of Rs. 1,45,29,469/- available with the 2nd respondent. However, the 2nd respondent has wrongly calculated and revised as Rs. 2,82,80,800/- towards ACCD, which is against the Regulation. In fact, a sum of Rs. 3,89,069/- is in excess of the required ACCD and the same has to be adjusted or refunded under Regulation 5(5)(v) of the Supply Code, 2004.
3.7. The petitione
