2021 Supreme(Mad) 693
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
SANJIB BANERJEE, SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY, JJ.
Coimbatore Consumer Cause, Rep. by its Secretary K. Kathirmathiyon, Coimbatore - Petitioner
Versus
The Chairman & Managing Director, TANGEDCO, Chennai & Others - Respondent
W.P. No. 15344 of 2020
Decided On : 17-03-2021
For the Petitioner:S. Sathia Chandran, Advocate.
For the Respondents:P.H. Arvindh Pandian, Addl. Advocate-General assisted by Abdul Saleem, Advocates, G.K. Muthukumar, Spl. Government Pleader.
Compliance with the Tamil Nadu Combined Building Development Rules, 2019 is mandatory for the grant of electricity service connections.
Headnote:
Electricity Supply Connections - Tamil Nadu Combined Building Development Rules, 2019 - The court directed TANGEDCO to comply strictly with the 2019 Rules for the grant of all electricity service connections.
Fact of the Case:
The petition challenges a memorandum issued by TANGEDCO and seeks strict enforcement of the Tamil Nadu Combined Building Development Rules, 2019 (the 2019 Rules) regarding the provision of service connections without a completion certificate.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the draft scheme prepared by TANGEDCO for providing electricity supply connections deviated from the requirements of the 2019 Rules and was contrary to Rule 20 of the 2019 Rules.
Issues: The issues involved the deviation from the 2019 Rules in providing electricity supply connections and the authority of TANGEDCO to issue the scheme.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that TANGEDCO must comply strictly with the 2019 Rules for the grant of all electricity service connections, and the draft scheme should not contravene extant laws or rules.
Final Decision: The court directed TANGEDCO to adhere strictly to the 2019 Rules while providing Low Tension electricity supply connections to the classes of consumers indicated in the draft scheme.
JUDGMENT :
Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy, J.
Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issue of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the entire records connected with the impugned Memo No.CE/Comml/SE/Comml/ EE3/AEE2/ F.Plg.Per/FLM-M/ 189/2020 dated 06.10.2020 issued by the second respondent and quash the same and consequently, directing respondents 1 to 4 to issue appropriate orders/instructions/directions to all the authorities concerned to strictly enforce the Tamilnadu Combined Development and Building Rules, 2019 in respect of insisting mandatory Building Completion Certificate for providing Electricity, Water and Sewage connections.
1. This public interest litigation challenges a memorandum issued by the TANGEDCO on 06.10.2020 and prays for strict enforcement of the Tamil Nadu Combined Building Development Rules, 2019 (the 2019 Rules).
2. The 2019 Rules specify that service connections such as electricity supply connections, water supply connections and sewerage connections should not be provided for the classes of buildings specified in Rule 20 thereof, unless a completion certificate is obtained from the development authority.
3. The writ petitioner asserts that the memorandum under challenge deviates from the requirements of the 2019 Rules and, in particular, Rule 20 thereof.
4. Learned counsel for the writ petitioner asserts that the 2019 Rules were framed pursuant to orders passed by this Court. He submits that the said rules are intended to prevent unauthorised constructions, which are subsequently regularised. Under the guise of the impugned memorandum, it is contended that the TANGEDCO is enabling persons who put up unauthorised constructions to obtain electricity supply connections.
5. Learned counsel for the writ petitioner also submitted that the writ petitioner is not opposed to the grant of electricity supply connections to persons who require electricity supply connections for temporary structures or small portions of buildings and that, therefore, a representation of 02.01.2021 was made requesting the Government to extend exemptions to places where there are no buildings such as public parks, bore well connections, temporary structures, etc.
6. The last contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is that TANGEDCO is not empowered to issue a scheme because it is only a distribution licensee. Therefore, any such scheme should be issued by the TNERC.
7. Learned Additional Advocate-General appears on behalf of the TANGEDCO and submits that a draft scheme has been prepared by the TANGEDCO in order to provide electricity supply connections to certain classes of consumers. These consumers are either persons who have set up small shops or occupy small portions of existing buildings. They require Low Tension electricity supply connections and a completion certificate cannot be insisted upon from these categories of consumers. He also points out that requisite safeguards have been provided and that the property tax receipt issued by the competent authority is required before the application for service connection is considered. With regard to unauthorised constructions, he points out that the connection would be disconnected, if the Corporation or other Municipal authorities have initiated lock and seal or other action under the relevant legislations. Learned Additional Advocate-General submits that the draft scheme is in accordance with the 2019 Rules.
8. With regard to the power to frame the scheme, learned Additional Advocate-General submits that the TANGEDCO is under an obligation to supply electricity to consumers both under the Electricity Act, 2003 and the Tamil Nadu Electricity Supply Code, 2004. This contention is meritorious, inasmuch as the scheme is no more than a set of objective standards on the basis of which TANGEDCO would perform its statutory obligations. This is, however, subject to the caveat that the scheme should not contravene extant laws or rules, and we ex