1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 19.12.2011 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.RAMASUBRAMANIAN Writ Petition(MD)No.12737 of 2011 and MP[MD]NOS.1 & 2 OF 2011 M/s.Tower Steels Ltd., HT.Sc.No.112, Plot Nos.C-20 and 21, SIDCO Industrial Estate, Kappalur, Madurai-625 008, Rep.by its Proprietor cum Lessee, S.Thangamani of Sri Raghavendhra Corporation ... Petitioner Vs. 1.The Chairman, Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, 144, Anna Salai, Chennai-600 002. 2.The Executive Engineer, TANGEDCO, Madurai Circle, Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, Thirumangalam, Madurai. ... Respondents PRAYER: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorari, calling for the records of the 2nd respondent in Lr.No.EE/TMG/DM/ F.HT.SC.No.112/D.No.891/2010, dated 04.03.2010 and quash the same as illegal, arbitrary and against the provisions of the Electricity Act 2003 and the Regulations of Tamil Nadu Electricity Supply Code 2004. For Petitioner : Mr.C.Maha Devan For M/s.AL.Gandhimathi For Respondents : Mrs.S.Srimathi for Mr.S.M.S.Johnny Basha. for TNEB O R D E R The petitioner has come up with the above writ petition challenging a final assessment order passed in terms of Section 135 of the Electricity Act 2003 read with Regulation 23(AA) of the Tamil Nadu Electricity Supply Code. 2.Heard Mr.C.Mahadevan, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mrs.Srimathy, learned counsel representing Mr.S.M.S.Johnny Basha, learned standing counsel for the respondents. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 3.On an inspection of the premises of the petitioner on 04.01.2010, it was found that the metering set of both the main and check meter and current transformer secondary termiis gap solid copper wires were found inserted and short circuited. Therefore, the officials inspecting the premises issued a provisional assessment order, dated 04.01.2010 and called upon the petitioner to attend an enquiry. 4.Unfortunately, the petitioner did not attend the enquiry. The enquiry was adjourned to several dates namely 08.02.2010, 15.02.2010 and 02.03.2010. After attending the hearing on 20.02.2010 and asking for copies of certain documents, the petitioner did not attend the enquiry on 02.03.2010. Consequently, the second respondent panal box cover were tampered and manually a gap was created. Through thssed the final assessment order dated 04.03.2010. After going round in circles, the petitioner has come up with the above writ petition, challenging the final assessment order, dated 04.03.2010, after a gap of about 21 months. 5.Fortunately, the service connection has been disconnected, in view of the proceedings initiated. Today, there is no connection. Under sub Section (1-A) of Section 135 of the Electricity Act 2003, the petitioner will be entitled to restoration of connection only upon payment of the total amount levied under the impugned order. Therefore, the petitioner cannot seek reconnection till he pays the whole amount. 6.Coming to the challenge to the final assessment order, it is seen that the petitioner was given several opportunities. The petitioner failed to avail those opportunities. Though the representative of the petitioner attended the hearing on 20.02.2010 and sought copies of documents, he did not appear on 02.03.2010. Consequently, the impugned order was passed as an exparte order. Therefore, I thought that no prejudice will be caused to the respondents by allowing one opportunity to be granted to the petitioner, before passing a final assessment order. 7.However, the learned counsel for the respondents brought to my notice, the orders passed by this Court on two earlier occasions against the petitioner and his lessor. The first case is in Crl.O.P.(MD) Nos.264 and 266 of 2010, dated 10.02.2010. The order passed in the said criminal original petitions gives a list of criminal cases filed against the petitioner and his lessor. They are reproduced as follows: Sl. No. Name of the Concern FIR Details Quantum/Value of Power theft Accused in FIR 1 Sri Radhakrishna Multiple Industries P. Ltd., Door No.30A, SIDCO Industrial Estate, Kappalur, Tirumangalam Taluk, Madurai District. Service No.B-164 FIR No.298/2005 dated 02.03.2005 81,889 Units of value Rs.6lakhs D.Thillairaj (Director) Seenivasan (Supervisor) https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 3 Sl. No. Name of the Concern FIR Details Quantum/Value of Power theft Accused in FIR 2 Sri Radhakrishna Multiple Industries P. Ltd., Shed Nos.179 & 186, SIDCO Industrial Estate, Kappalur, Tirumangalam Taluk, Madurai District. HT SC No.182 FIR No.516/2006 dated 17.07.2006 12,82,594 Units of value Rs.107.09 lakhs D.Thillairaj (Director) I.Ranjithkum a r (Lessee) 3 Sri Radhakrishna Multiple Industries P. Ltd., Shed Nos.179 & 186, SIDCO Industrial Estate, Kappalur, Tirumangalam Taluk, Madurai District. HT SC No.182 FIR No.49/2007 dated 10.02.2007 9,97,486 Units of value Rs.86.26lakhs D.Thillairaj D.Thangaraj Kangaraj (Directors) 4 Kumaran Chemicals Pvt.Ltd. North Vanjure, T.R.Pattinam, Karaikal, Union Territory of Pondicherry FIR No.132/2006 dated 08.08.2006 Around 20 lakh units of value Rs.110lakhs Management of Kumaran Chemical (P) Ltd. 5 Kumaran Chemicals Pvt.Ltd. North Vanjure, T.R.Pattinam, Karaikal, Union Territory of Pondicherry FIR No.11232 dated 24.02.2007 Estimated theft of power theft after filing FIR is around Rs.1crore value D.Thillairaj (Owner), Uma Sankar, (Plant Incharge), Selvaraj (Clerk) 6 Vaibhav Corporation, No.1, Thatchanenthal Road, Uranganpatti Post, Varichiyur, Madurai District. HT SC No.168 FIR No.557/2006 dated 25.07.2006 65,90,720 Units of value Rs.559.28 lakhs D.Thillairaj Partner, T.Mathavi Partner, K.Sabitha Kanagaraj Partner P.Selvam Lessee 7 Vaibhav Corporation, No.1, Thatchanenthal Road, Uranganpatti Post, Varichiyur, Madurai District. HT SC No.168 FIR No.309/2008 dated 11.11.2008 48,20,616 Units of value Rs.450.87 lakhs D.Thillairaj Partner, T.Mathavi Partner, K.Sabitha Kanagaraj Partner https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 4 Sl. No. Name of the Concern FIR Details Quantum/Value of Power theft Accused in FIR 8 Tower Steel Ltd. C-19 to C-21, Kappalur, SIDCO Industrial Estate, Thirumangalam. HT SC No.112 FIR No.10/2010 dated 04.01.2010 Theft of electricity of value Rs.7,55,37,42 8/- D.Thillairaj Partner D.Thangaraj Partner, Thangamani (Lessee). Total value of electricity stolen Rs.2174.87 lakhs 9 Vaibhav Corporation, No.1, Thatchanenthal Road, Uranganpatti Post, Varichiyur, Madurai District. Theft of Railway property registered in Crime No.24/2008 RPF, Madurai. Theft of railway rails D.Thillairaj Partner T.Mathavi Partner, K.Sabitha Kanagaraj Partner 8.The second case was in Crl.O.P(MD)Nos.3321 of 2010 etc., dated 08.06.2010. Even there, the entire list of 9 criminal cases filed against the petitioner and his lessor are listed. Therefore, the learned counsel for the respondents submitted that the petitioner should only go before the Appellate Tribunal and does not deserve any sympathy. 9.The list of cases furnished above, convinces me that the petitioner cannot be granted any concession. The only remedy open to him is to file a statutory appeal in terms of the provisions of the Electricity Act, 2003. It is also open to him to pay the entire amount due for securing reconnection in terms of Section 135(1-A) of the Act. Hence, the writ petition is dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. sms Sd/- Assistant Registrar[AS] /True copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar To 1.THE CHAIRMAN,TAMIL NADU ELECTRICITY BOARD, 144, ANNA SALAI CHENNAI- 2.THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, TANGEDCO, MADURAI CIRCLE, TAMIL NADU ELECTRICITY BOARD, THIRUMANGALAM, MADURAI. +1 CC TO M/S.AL.GANTHIMATHI, ADVOCATE SR.NO.44676. +1 CC TO M/S.SMS.JOHNNY BASHA, ADVOCATE SR.NO.44782. Writ Petition(MD)No.12737 of 2011 and MP[MD]NOS.1 & 2 OF 2011 DATED:19.12.2011 4P/5C RPB : 02.01.2012 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/