THE HON’BLE Ms. JUSTICE G. ROHINI WRIT PETITION No.10318 of 2001 O R D E R : This writ petition is filed seeking a declaration that the action of the respondents in fixing the deficit collection of Fuel Cost Adjustment (FCA) charges at Rs.5.21 ps per unit for the year 1998-99 as arbitrary, illegal and contrary to Section 26 of the Electricity Reforms Act, 1998. When the matter is taken up for consideration, it is brought to my notice by the learned counsel for both the parties that W.P.No.8444 of 2000 and batch in which an identical question was raised, was allowed by this Court by common order dated 08.09.2008 with directions as under : “In the result, all the writ petitions are allowed to the extent indicated below: The respondents shall work out: (1) Total number of units consumed by all the consumers in each financial year; (2) Total fuel cost adjustment charges in one financial year; (3) Total number of units consumed by HT and LT-III consumers. Divide the total fuel cost adjustment charges with number of units consumed by HT and LT-III consumers; (4) Arrive at the extra cost to be born by the HT and LT-III consumers per unit; (5) Multiply additional cost of each unit with the units consumed by each HT and LT-III consumer; (6) Total additional cost payable by each HT and LT-III consumer to be arrived at; (7) Out of the total additional cost payable by each consumer, the amount paid towards provisional assessment by each consumer has to be deducted; (8) The balance has to be arrived at, which will disclose whether he paid excess amount or there is deficit payable; (9) On doing such calculation, the respondents have to give the details of calculation in respect of each consumer and take steps either to refund the amount paid in excess or demand the amount payable by the consumer. The demand notices issued by the respondents are illegal, therefore, they are set aside. The respondents are at liberty to issue fresh demand notices after working out the amount towards fuel cost adjustment as indicated above. No order as to costs.” It is not disputed before this Court that the petitioner herein is also similarly situated. Accordingly, following the above order in W.P.No.8444 of 2000 and batch, dated 08.09.2008, this Writ Petition is allowed in terms of the order extracted above. No costs. ______________ G. ROHINI, J Dated: 22-01-2009 gbs