IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 25.10.2021 CORAM :

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.ANAND VENKATESH Writ Petition No.21197 of 2021 & W.M.P.No. 22478 of2021 Bridgewood Owners Association, Rep by its President, Mr. Sairam Srinivasan Buckingham Street, House of Hiranandani

5/63, Rajiv Gandhi Salai, Egattur, Thalambur Post, Chennai - 600130 …. Petitioner -Vs-

1.Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation Rep by its Chairman, 10th Floor, NPKKR Maligai, Anna Salai, Chennai - 600 002.

2.Tamil Nadu Electricity Regulation Commission No. 19-A, Rukmani Lakshmipathi Road, Anna Salai, Egmore, Chennai - 600 008.

3.Assistant Engineer O and M Siruseri, CEDC / South-II, Chennai 130.

4.Superintending Engineer, CEDC / South-II Chennai 113.

…. Respondents Prayer: Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, or any other appropriate writ, order or directionin the nature of Certiorarified mandamus calling for the records relating to the impugned Letter dated 1st respondent dated 25.10.2018 bearing Ref. No. Lr. No. Dir / F / CFC / Reg. Cell / FC / SE / RC / F. Tariff Clarification / D. No. 439 / 18 issued by the 1st respondent and quash the same as illegal and arbitrary and direct the 3rd respondent to refund the sum of Rs. 11,49,591/- paid by the petitioner under protest towards excess Electricity charges levied under Commercial Tariff of Services Nos. 2960061017, 2960061018, 2960061019, 2960061021, 296004116 and 296004117 and further direct the 3rd respondent to reassess the Tariff and apply Domestic Tariff LT AI instead of LM51 or Commercial Tariff.

For Petitioner : M/S. Rohan Rajasekaran For Respondents : Mr. L.Jaivenkatesh Standing Counsel

O R D E R

This writ petition has been filed challenging the impugned letter dated 25.10.2018 issued by the 1^st respondent and for a direction to the 3^rd respondent to refund the amount that has been paid by the petitioner under protest and for a further direction to the 3^rd respondent to apply the domestic tariff LTAI instead of the commercial tariff LM51.

2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents.

3. The case of the petitioner association is that the property consists of 2 wings each consisting stilt and 28 floors. Totally, there are 216 apartments in the said tower. Admittedly, the Bridge Wood Tower is a residential complex. The 1^st respondent has also sanctioned domestic tariff payable by the petitioner on a bi-monthly basis. While so, a letter was issued by the 3^rd respondent to the effect that the existing common service will be applicable only to the electricity consumption arising out of usage of lights, motor and lift and if there is any other load used in the existing common service connection, the petitioner association must apply for a new service connection under commercial tariff.

4. The petitioner gave a reply to the effect that they did not have any facilities that would attract levy of commercial tariff and sought for a clarification. In reply to the same, the impugned letter dated 25.10.2018 came to be issued by the 1^st respondent stating that LT tariff V will be adopted to the fire pumps and fire safety equipments. That apart, penalty/ arrears was also claimed from September 2017 onwards. The petitioner had no other option except to make the payment and according to the petitioner, they have paid a sum of Rs.11,49,591/- till the date of filing of the writ petition. Aggrieved by the same, the present writ petition has been filed before this Court.

5. The issue involved in the present writ petition is squarely covered by the order passed by this Court in a batch of writ petitions in W.P.No. 35065 of 2019 etc., dated 15.09.2021. The relevant portions in the order are extracted hereunder :-

6.In the considered view of this Court, the action taken by the respondents has to be characterized as hasty without any basis. It is clear from the tariff order i