Back
2024 Supreme(Telangana) 258
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
SUREPALLI NANDA, J.
M/s Sri Sai Raja Rajeshwari Spinning Mills Pvt. Ltd. – Petitioner
Versus
Northern Power Distribution Company of Telangana Ltd. and Others – Respondents
Writ Petition No. 14618 of 2022
Decided On : 03-06-2024
For the Petitioner: Vimal Varma Vasireddy.
For the Respondent: Zakir Ali Danish.
IMPORTANT POINT
Consumers are liable to pay electricity dues as per the provisions of the Electricity Act, and the authority to recover such dues is upheld by the court.
Headnote:
Electricity - Writ Petition - Act 28 of 1984, Rule 4 - The court interpreted the provisions of the Electricity Act and related rules, emphasizing the liability of consumers to pay dues and the authority of the respondents to recover such amounts, influencing the dismissal of the writ petition.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, a spinning mill, challenged a demand notice for unpaid electricity dues while disputing the amounts claimed and the legality of disconnection of power supply amidst ongoing grievances and appeals regarding billing disputes.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the petitioner was not entitled to relief as the Vidyut Ombudsman had upheld the respondents' claims for dues, and the appeal had been dismissed, confirming the respondents' authority to recover the amounts owed.
Issues: Whether the demand notice issued by the respondents was legal and whether the petitioner was entitled to restore power supply without settling the claimed dues.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the petitioner must comply with the provisions of the Electricity Act and the rules governing the recovery of dues, as the Ombudsman's decision was final and binding.
Result: The writ petition was dismissed, and the interim orders were vacated.
ORDER :
1. Heard Sri Vimal Varma Vasireddy, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, Sri Zakir Ali Danish learned standing counsel appearing on behalf of respondent Nos.1 to 4 and the learned Government Pleader for Revenue appearing on behalf of the 5th Respondent.
2. The petitioner approached the Court seeking prayer as under:
“.....to issue a writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus:
(a) declaring the high handed action of the respondents in issuing Notice in Form-A under Rule4(1) A.P/T.S. Electricity Board (Recovery of Dues) Rules, 1985 in Lr.No. SE/OP/KNR/SAO/AAO/HT/AAO(HT)1A/D No. 465/21, dated 21.01.2022 (served on 02.03.2022 to the security guard) demanding to pay an amount of Rs.6,57,128-97/- for SC.No. KRN086 and Rs.3,46,07,471/-for S.C. No. KRN 087 towards electricity and delayed payment charges as wholly illegal, untenable arbitrary, unjust, without jurisdiction, contrary to the provisions of Electricity Act, 2003 supply code Regulation No. 3 of 2004, General Terms of Supply Conditions,
(b) consequently, direct the respondents to forthwith restore power supply to the aforementioned service connection of the petitioner.”
3. The case of the petitioner in brief, as per the averments made in the affidavit filed in support of the present writ petition:
(a) The petitioner Mill was established as a spinning Mill during the year 2006 and was carrying cotton business since then. Initially the petitioner had applied to the respondent DISCOM requesting to provide a service connection of power supply for 600 KVA at 33KV line erected and stationed nearby the unit and the same has been provided with Service Connection bearing No. KRN/87.
(b) However, there is a dispute with respect to the liability of amount payable to the respondents. The respondents have demanded the liability as arrears with huge variation to the bills issued and the amounts paid to them without credence of the benefits given by State Government incentives, discounts etc., as policy. Due to the power cuts as well the other business constraints, the unit turned to be a sick Industry and was closed for certain period. As such, a dispute was raised before the Consumer Grievance Redressal Forum, Warangal in C.C. No. 195/2019.
(c) While the billing dispute is pending for adjudication before the Forum, the respondents by issuing a demand notice date 13.12.2019 disconnected the power supply. Aggrieved by the action of the respondents, WP. No. 27922 of 2019 was filed before this court and the court has interim direction dated 16.12.2019 for restoring the power supply on the condition that the appellant shall pay an amount of Rs.33,00,000/-out of total amount of arrears shown as outstanding levied from the appellant. Therefore, payment was made as per directions and the power supply was restored.
(d) While the things stood thus, the respondents have again issued another Notice dated 21.01.2020, stating the amounts shown under the demand notice shall be paid within three (3) days or else, the power supply will be disconnected. But, the respondent Discom even without waiting till schedule mentioned time under demand notice, have disconnected the power supply at about 2.30PM on the same day of Notice. Aggrieved by the same, W.P No. 1352 of 2020 was filed by the Petitioner unit before this Court and an interim order dated 22.01.2020 was passed directing to restore the power supply to the petitioner unit subject to payment of Rs.23,60,617 /-.
(e) Subsequently,Covid-19 pandemic situation has set-in and the entire business activities and transactions of the Petitioner came to a grinding halt and both the writ petitions filed before this Court were disposed off by a common order dated 06.04.2021 directing the Forums below to decide the dispute raised by the unit and pass necessary orders. In pursuance of the order dated 06.04.2021 of this Court the CGRF in C.G. No. 195/2019-20 dated29.06.2021 held that TSNDCL have reviewed the revi
