Back
2024 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 78133
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
M.Dhandapani, J
Dr.SJS Paul Memorial College of Engineering & Technology – Appellant
Versus
Managing Director Electricity Department Government of Puducherry – Respondent
W.P.Nos. 14613, 14684, 16269, 16276 and 15661 of 2020
For the Appellants/Petitioners: S.Prem Auxilian Raj, Vijayan Subramanian
For the Respondents: V.Vasanthakumar
Maximum demand charges cannot be levied on High Tension electricity consumers during periods of total lockdown mandated by the government, as such charges are unsustainable and inconsistent with the statutory obligation to pay only for actual consumption or specified minimum charges when operational usage is prohibited.
Headnote:(A) Constitution of India - Article 226 - High Tension (HT) Electricity Service Connection - Pandemic Lockdown - Maximum Demand Charges - Legality of demand during total lockdown - Petitioners challenged the levying of maximum demand charges during the period their establishments (colleges/hotels) were forcibly closed due to government-mandated COVID-19 lockdown orders - Court observed that the issue stands settled by previous judicial precedents involving identical circumstances where it was held that levying maximum demand charges when consumers are prevented from using electricity is unsustainable and illegal. (Paras 9, 10)
Facts of the case:
The petitioners, holding High Tension electricity service connections, were forced to shut down their operations (colleges and hotels) following government lockdown orders during the COVID-19 pandemic. Despite the lack of operation, the Electricity Department of Puducherry raised invoices including maximum demand charges for the period of March 2020 to August 2020. The petitioners contested these charges, arguing they were only liable for actual consumption charges and seeking a waiver of the fixed demand penalty during the lockdown period.
Findings of Court:
The court held that the collection of maximum demand charges during the period of forced closure was illegal and inconsistent with previous rulings set by the same court. Following the precedent set in previous writ petition batches, the court directed that only actual minimum charges or consumption charges should be applied during the period of total lockdown as defined by government orders.
Issues: Whether the Electricity Department is entitled to collect maximum demand charges from High Tension consumers when such establishments were legally prevented from operating due to the COVID-19 lockdown.
Ratio Decidendi: The principle established is that maximum demand charges cannot be levied against HT consumers who were prevented from consuming electricity due to statutory lockdown orders; therefore, only charges for actual electricity consumption should be recovered for that period.
Result: Petitions allowed in terms of previous settled orders.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. disposal of writ petitions challenging electricity demand charges during pandemic lockdown. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. illegal nature of maximum demand charges under lockdown-induced prohibition of usage. (Para 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10) |
COMMON ORDER
Since the issues arises in the writ petitions are one and the same, the same are disposed of by way of this common order.
2. The writ petitioners have obtained HT service connection for their colleges, hotels and premises. They used the electricity only for the maintenance purpose during Covid-19. However, the respondents demaneded exorbitant amount for electricity charges from the month of March 2020 to August-2020 and the same is not in accordance with law. Hence, the petitioners have filed these petitions seeks to quash the impugned high tension energy consumption bills issued by the respective respondents on various dates.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the situation faced by the petitioners in not permitting them to run the hotel/colleges due to the lockdown order issued by the Puducherry Government. The second respondent should have collected only the minimum charges. As per the common clause in all the High Tension Power Supply agreement, the petitioner shall pay the minimum demand charges every month as prescribed in the supply code. The petitioner closed there premises as per the order passed by the Puducherry government and the closure continues till September 2020. For this reason, the petitioner being the licensee cannot be demanded and collected the entire demand charges, when the consumer has been prevented from consuming electricity by way of lockdown order issued by Puducherry Government.
4. The learned counsel further submitted that in a similar situation, W.P.Nos.7678/2020 & etc., batch were filed in State of Tamil Nadu and the said batch of writ petitions were allowed on 14.08.2020 and this Court has concluded that the maximum demand charges and the compensation charges levied by TANGEDCO against the consumers who are HT consumers, is illegal and unsustainable. Accordingly, the maximum demand charges and the compensation towards low PF that have been questioned in the impugned bills raised by the TANGEDCO for each of the consumers are quashed. Hence, this Court may quash the impugned bills issued by the second respondent.
5. The learned counsel further submitted that while entertaining the writ petitions, the petitioners paid the HT unit charges, surcharge amount, PF incentive amount except demand charges. Even in respect of Pondicherry, this Court passed an order in W.P.no.660 of 2021 dated 30.03.2021 following the earlier order passed by this Court in W.P.Nos.7678/2020 & etc dated 14.08.2020.
6. The learned counsel for the respondents filed counter and the relevant paragraphs are extracted hereunder:
"8. I respectfully submit that the Petitioner has entered into the Agreement in accordance to the regulations framed by the Hon'ble Joint Electricity Regulatory Commission (Electricity Supply Code) Regulations, 2010, the Terms and Conditions of the said HT agreement are strictly applicable as adopted and applied to all the HT Consumers. Hence, the Electricity Department has raised the Current Consumption charges bills by pursuing the guidelines of the Tariff orders issued by the Hon'ble Joint Electricity Regulatory Commission.
9. I respectfully submit that in exercise of the power conferred by section 51-A of the Indian Electricity Act, 1910 (Central Act IX of 1910), read with sections 21 and 49 of the Electricity (Supply) Act, 1948 (54 of 1948) and the Notification No.F-2/3/66-UTL,
10. I respectfully submit that the High Tension power supply agreement has been executed between the petitioner and the Electricity Department as per the regulations 6.08 of the Joint Electricity Regulatory Commission (Electricity Supply Code) Regulations, 2010 only and in the said supply code, waiving of Current Consumption charges is not perm
