IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATE: 08.02.2010 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.JAICHANDREN Writ Petition No.26989 of 2009 & M.P.Nos.1 and 2 of 2010 G.B.Food Oil Private Limited, HTSC No.41 (TEDC), 5/15, Eswara Nagar, Ramapuram, Chennai-89 repd.By its Manager C.Alex ... Petitioner Versus 1.The Chairman, Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, 144, Anna Salai, Chennai- 600 002. 2.The Chief Engineer (Commercial), Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, 144, Anna Salai, Chennai- 600 002. 3.The Chief Engineer(Distribution), Trichy Region, TNEB,Thennur, Trichy-17 4.The Superintending Engineer, Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, Thanjavur Electricity Distribution Circle, Thanjavur ... Respondents Prayer: This petition has been filed seeking for a writ of Mandamus, to direct the 1st and 2nd respondent to permit the petitioner to avail the optimum demand concept as per clause 1 (n) of memo dated 01.11.2008 issue by the 1st and 2nd respondent to run the petitioner industry as continuous process industry without peak hour restrictions with restricted power holidays. For Petitioner : Mr.R.S.Pandiyaraj For Respondents : Mr.A.Selvendran (R1 & R2) Mr.P.Srinivas(R3 and R4) https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ O R D E R This petition has been filed, praying for a Writ of Mandamus, to direct the first and the second respondents, to permit the petitioner, to avail the Optimum Demand concept, as per clause 1 (n) of memo, dated, 01.11.2008, issued by the first and the second respondents to run the petitioner industry, as a continuous process industry, without peak hour restrictions, with restricted power holidays. 2.Though various grounds had been raised in the Writ Petition to substantiate the averments made by the petitioner in the affidavit filed in support of the Writ Petition, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner had submitted that it would suffice if the petitioner is permitted to raise all the grounds, which have been raised in the present Writ Petition, if and when the respondents issue a demand notice, with regard to the peak hour penalty to be paid by the petitioner. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner had further submitted that, the penalty levied on the petitioner, during evening peak hours, by the Superintending Engineer, Thanjavur Electricity Distribution Circle, Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, Thanjavur, in Bill No.41, dated 31.08.2009, had been set aside by this Court, by an order, dated 15.12.2009, in Writ Petition No.9982 of 2009. 4. Though the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents had submitted that the petitioner is liable to be imposed with the evening peak hour restrictions, he had not raised any objection at the time, when the demand was made against the petitioner, with regard to the exceeding of the quota, by the petitioner, during the evening peak hours. 5. In such circumstances, it is open to the petitioner to raise all the grounds available to him, including the grounds raised in the present Writ Petition, when the respondents make a demand against the petitioner, with regard to his exceeding the quota during evening peak hours. It is also open to the petitioner to make a representation to the respondents, with regard to the Optimum Demand, which the petitioner is eligible for, as a continuous process industry, without peak hour restrictions and with restricted power holidays. On such representation being made, the concerned respondents are directed to pass appropriate orders thereon,on merits, and in accordance with law, considering the request of the petitioner, within a period of fifteen days thereafter. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 6. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of with the above directions. No costs. Consequently connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed. 7. If the respondents are not satisfied with the reply submitted by the petitioner, the respondents would be at liberty to pass appropriate orders on such demand made by the respondents, taking into consideration, the objections raised by the petitioner and thereafter to, initiate necessary action, in accordance with the procedures established by law. arr Sd/- Asst. Registrar //True Copy// Sub Asst. Registrar To 1.The Chairman, Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, 144, Anna Salai, Chennai- 600 002. 2.The Chief Engineer (Commercial), Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, 144, Anna Salai, Chennai- 600 002. 3.The Chief Engineer(Distribution), Trichy Region, TNEB,Thennur, Trichy-17 4.The Superintending Engineer, Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, Thanjavur Electricity Distribution Circle, Thanjavur + 1 cc to Mr. P. Srinivas, Advocate SR No.7816 + 1 cc to Mr. R.S.Pandiaraj, Advocate SR No.7669 W.P.No.26989 of 2009 RJ(CO) SR/12.2.2010 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/