IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED 24.11.2021

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE KRISHNAN RAMASAMY

W.P.No.10629 of 2017

and

W.M.P.Nos.11565 & 11566 of 2017

KKP Textiles Private Limited,

HTSC No.257 (Old HTSC No.159),

88, Salem Road,

Namakkal – 637 001.

represented by its Managing Director

P.Nallathambi

...Petitioner

..Vs..

1. State of Tamil Nadu,

Rep.by the Secretary to Government,

Energy Department,

Secretariat, Fort St.George,

Chennai – 600 009.

2. The TANGEDCO,

Rep.by its Chairman,

No.144 Anna Salai,

Chennai – 600 002.

3. The Chief Engineer / Commercial,

TANGEDCO,

144, Anna Salai,

Chennai – 600 002.

4. The Superintending Engineer,

Mettur Electricity Distribution Circle,

TANGEDCO,

Mettur Dam.

5. The Superintending Engineer,

Namakkal Electricity Distribution Circle,

TANGEDCO,

Namakkal.

...Respondents

PRAYER : Petition filed Under Article 226 of the Constitution

of India praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus,

calling for the records of the 3^rd respondent in his impugned

demand

notice

dated

08.08.2016

bearing

Lr.No.SE/NEDC/NKL/DFC/HT/AS/Asst/F:HT 159/2016 and quash the

same as illegal, arbitrary, without the authority of law and

consequently direct the respondents to grant tariff concession

to the petitioner industry by following the procedure laid

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in its Judgment dated

16.05.2008 passed in Civil Appeal No.3940 of 2008.

For Petitioner

:

Mr.M.Saravana Kumar

For Respondents

:

Mr.Abdul Kalam

Standing Counsel

ORDER

This Writ Petition has been filed, praying to issue a

Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records of

the 3rd respondent in his impugned demand notice dated

08.08.2016 bearing Lr.No. SE/NEDC/NKL/DFC/HT/AS/ Asst/F:HT

159/2016 and quash the same as illegal, arbitrary, without the

authority of law and consequently direct the respondents to

grant the tariff concession to the petitioner industry by

following the procedure laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court

in its Judgment dated 16.05.2008 passed in Civil Appeal

No.3940 of 2008.

2. The petitioner has come forward with the plea that in

pursuance to the issuance of G.O. Ms. No. 29 Energy (A2)

Department dated 31.01.1995 they were enthused to establish

the industry, with a view to get tariff concession as

mentioned therein and ultimately they have set up the

industry, but due to some reason or other giving power

connection was delayed beyond 14.02.1997, which resulted in

refusal by the respondents in extending infancy benefit made

available as tariff concession as ordered by the Government,

in G.O.Ms.No.29 Energy (A2) Department dated 31.01.1995.

3. The Learned Counsel for the petitioner would submit

that the petitioner has set up an industry, (i.e.), a Spinning

Mill with a capital investment of around Rs.1.5 Crores and

made an application 13.03.1995 itself for a maximum demand of

500 KVA of supply of electrical energy under the category of

"High Tension" which was also registered by the 4th respondent

on 25.04.1995. The said application was kept pending for more

than 10 months without assigning any reason by the

respondents. Later, vide the communication dated 20.02.1996,

the 3rd respondent sanctioned the demand of 500 KVA and

pursuant to the same, the petitioner also paid EMD of

Rs.1,50,000/- on 22.02.1996. Thereafter, the petitioner vide

communication dated 11.03.1996, expressed its readiness to

avail power after completion of civil works and having

installed equipment at the site. While so, there was no

response from the respondents despite the petitioner

approaching them periodically and, in the meanwhile, the

tariff concession Notification issued in G.O.Ms.No.29 dated

31.01.1995 was withdrawn by the Governm