JUDGMENT :

(Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records of the case from the file of the second respondent in Lr.No.SE/CEDC/NEE/GI/AEE/GI/AE/F.F.HT.2038/D.1531/16 dated 15.09.2016 and quash the same and hold as not maintainable under law more specifically under the express provisions made in the CEA (Technical Standards for Connectivity to the Grid) Regulations 2007 under Regulation 2 Clause 8, Clause 34 and Regulation 3 and forbearing the respondents 1 to 3 from raising any demand for payment towards surcharge for not providing harmonic controls by the petitioner who is connected with a 11KV supply line.)

1. The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner challenging the levy of harmonics compensation charges at 15% of the respective tariff from the High Tension Industrial Consumers (HT-I) and High Tension Commercial Consumers (HT-III), who operate at a voltage level of below 33 kv, namely, 11kv/22kv supply lines.

2. Mr.Lakshmi Sriram, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner in the present writ petition, submitted that the action of the Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation Limited (TANGEDCO) under the guise of enforcing the Central Electricity Authority (Technical Standards for Connectivity to the Grid) Regulations, 2007 (in short “CEA Regulations, 2007”) and the Tariff Order of the Tamil Nadu Electricity Regulatory Commission (TNERC), directing all the HT Consumers in the State of Tamil Nadu to install harmonic controls and imposing penalties in the form of 15% surcharge on the CC bills, irrespective of the supply line capacity they are connected to, are beyond the jurisdiction of the powers vested with them, as they do not have the authority of law. It is further contended that the impugned levy of harmonics charges on 11KV/22KV consumers are clearly not leviable in view the clarification issued by the CEA/Appellate Authority that it cannot be made applicable to consumers who are not bulk consumers i.e. connected with 11kv/22kv supply lines. Explaining further, it is stated that the CEA is the competent authority to declare the harmonic distortion level for consumers connected with 11kv/22kv supply lines, therefore, the impugned levy of harmonics charges on 11kv/22kv consumers are untenable.

3. Referring to paragraph 10.1.2 of the Tariff Order No.1, dealing with the harmonics, it is argued that as specified in the Supply Code, when the consumer fails to provide adequate harmonic suppression equipment to avoid dumping of harmonics beyond the limits as specified by the CEA Regulations into Lincesee's distribution system, he is liable to pay the compensation at 15% of the respective tariff and it further says that as and when the consumer brings down the harmonics level within the limit, the compensation chargeable shall be withdrawn, therefore, the measurement of harmonics shall be done by the Distribution Licensee using standard meters/ equipments in the presence of consumers or their representatives and this compensation provision is applicable to HT-I and HT-III category of consumers. Again, this paragraph makes it clear that the TANGEDCO shall give three months notice to all the consumers under these categories stating that they shall pay 15% compensation charges, if the harmonics introduced by their load are not within the limit set by the CEA. Thus, it is clear that the TANGEDCO is only the implementing agency in respect of compensation payable by the consumers, who failed to provide adequate harmonic suppression equipment to avoid dumping of harmonics beyond the limits as specified by the CEA Regulations into Lincesee's distribution system, by giving three months notice to all the consumers and then it also brought to the notice of the TANGEDCO to withdraw from the compensation charges as and when the consumer brings down the harmonics level within the limit. However, till