SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 74951

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Honourable Mr Justice N. SATHISH KUMAR
M/S.CHENNU ENTERPRISES – Appellant
Versus
TAMIL NADU ELECTRICITY REGULATORY – Respondent



##PAGE1##

2026:MHC:5

W.P.No.49784 of 2025

N THE IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASOF

JUDICATU MADRAS

Dated: 19.12.2025

C O R A M

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N. SATHISH KUMAR

W.P.No.49784 of 2025

M/s.Cheenu Enterprises

252-B, Mariamman Koil Street

Peelamedu Pudur, Coimbatore – 641 004

Rep. By its Partner M.Chaithanyakeerthy ..Petitioner

Vs.

1. Tamil Nadu Electricity Regulatory Commission

4th Floor, SIDCO Corporate Office Building

SIDCO Corporate Office Building

Thiru.Vi.Ka Industrial Estate

Guindy, Chennai – 600 032

Through its Secretary

2. Tamil Nadu Power Distribution Corporation Limited (TNPDCL)

10th Floor, 144 Anna Salai

Chennai – 600 002

Represented by its

Chairman and Managing Director

3. The Chief Engineer/NCES

Tamil Nadu Green Energy Corporation Ltd.,

(TNGECL)

2nd Floor, 144,Anna Salai

Chennai – 600 002

4. The Superintending Engineer

TNPDCL

Gobi Electricity Distribution Circle

Gobi … Respondents

1/8

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/01/2026 03:34:06 pm )

##PAGE2##

W.P.No.49784 of 2025

Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India for

issuance of writ of mandamus directing Respondents 2 to 4 to revise clause

6(ii) on Page No.8 of the energy Wheeling Agreement dated 03.01.2024

completely in line and consistent with para 5.5.8 of the Solar Tariff order

No. 9/2020 dated 16.10.2020 issued by the 1st respondent and

consequently direct the 4th respondent to accept the invoices of the

petitioner whenever raised for the encashment of the unutilized surplus

solar energy available at their account at the end of each month from the

date of commissioning at 75% of the tariff discovered in the competitive

bidding and to effect the payment within the due dates as provided in the

order No. 9/2020 dated 16.10.2020.

For Petitioners ... Mr.R.S.Pandiyaraj

For Respondents ... Mr.D.R.Arunkumar

Standing counsel for R1 to R5

------

O R D E R

This writ petition has been filed seeking issuance of a writ of

mandamus directing Respondents 2 to 4 to revise clause 6(ii) in Energy

Wheeling Agreement dated 03.01.2024 completely in line and consistent

with para 5.5.8 of the Solar Tariff order No. 9/2020 dated 16.10.2020

issued by the 1st respondent and consequently direct the 4th respondent to

accept the invoices of the petitioner whenever raised for the encashment of

the unutilized surplus solar energy available at their account at the end of

each month from the date of commissioning at 75% of the tariff discovered

in the competitive bidding and to effect the payment within the due dates as

provided in the order No. 9/2020 dated 16.10.2020.

2/8

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/01/2026 03:34:06 pm )

##PAGE3##

W.P.No.49784 of 2025

2. Heard Mr.R.S.Pandiyaraj, learned counsel for petitioner and

Mr.D.R.Arunkumar, learned Standing counsel for respondents.

3. The case of the petitioner is that they are having the high tension

service connection under the jurisdiction of the fifth respondent. The

petitioner made an application to the second respondent for arrangement of 5

MW Solar Power Plant. The petitioner was directed to pay the applicable

charges besides the refundable security deposit. The second respondent also

issued "Noted for Record" letter to the petitioner directing the Solar Power

Plant to be commissioned and synchronised in the grid belonging to the

respondents. The petitioner also satisfactorily commissioned the plant and

the same was also certified by the respondents.

4. Under instructions from the second respondent, the third respondent

had sent a letter enclosing Energy Wheeling Agreement dated 03.01.2024.

On perusal of the agreement, it was found that it contained clauses contrary

to the tariff order passed by the first respondent commission in order

No.9/20 dated 16.10.2020. As a result, the second respondent restricted the

petitioner from raising invoices for the unutilized excess solar energy

whenever available after consumption during the month. It is under these

circumstances, the present writ petition came to be filed before this Court.

3/8

https://www.mhc.tn.go

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top