1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 19.07.2011 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SUDHAKAR W.P(MD)Nos.8006 and 8007 of 2011 and M.P(MD)Nos.1 and 2 of 2011(In Both W.Ps) M/s.Harihar Alloys Private Limited, Represented by its Director, Regd. Office at 1/43, Race Course Road, Kajamalai, Trichy. .. Petitioner Vs. 1.The Superintending Engineer, Pudukottai Electricity Distribution Circle, TANGEDCO(formerly TNEB), Pudukottai. 2.The Assistant Executive Engineer, Operation & Maintenance, Tamil Nadu Electricity Board(TNEB), Now TANGEDCO, Viralimalai - 621 316. 3.Consumer Grievances Redressal Forum, President, Pudukottai Distribution Circle, Pudukottai. .. Respondents PRAYER IN W.P(MD)NO.8006 of 2011: Writ Petition is filed to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records of the third respondent culminating in his impugned proceedings bearingLr.No.K.Na.Me.Nu.K.M/P.M.P.V./Pdu/V.V.N.11/Thani.Nu.357/11, dated 30.06.2011 and direct the respondents to forthwith change the name of consumer in respect of HT SC 121 and 123 from Harihar Forging Private Ltd., and Harihar Alloys Castings Private Ltd., to Harihar Alloys Private Ltd. PRAYER in W.P(MD)No.8007 of 2011: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus,calling for the records of the third respondent culminating in his impugned proceedings bearing Lr.No.K.Na.Me.Nu.K.M/P.M.P.V/Pdu/V/ V.N.11/K.Thani.Nu/357/11, dated 30.06.2011, quash the same and direct the respondents to forthwith provide temporary supply of electricity for a load of 3 KW as requested in their application, dated 18.04.2011 to the petitioner and or any additional energy & demand, for new LT & HT connection as the case may be that the petitioner may be eligible for. For Petitioner : Mr.N.L.Rajah For Respondents : Mr.R.Murali for Mr.M.Suresh Kumar C O M M O N O R D E R These Writ Petitions have been filed challenging the proceedings of the third respondent in Lr.No.K.Na.Me.Nu.K.M/P.M.P.V./Pdu/V.V.N.11/ https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 Thani.Nu.357/11, dated 30.06.2011 and to direct the respondents to forthwith change the name of consumer in respect of HT SC Nos. 121 and 123 from M/s.Harihar Forging Private Ltd., and M/s.Harihar Alloys Castings Private Ltd., to M/s.Harihar Alloys Private Ltd., and to direct the respondents to forthwith provide temporary supply of electricity for a load of 3 KW as requested in their application, dated 18.04.2011 to the petitioner and or any additional energy & demand, for new LT & HT connection as the case may be that the petitioner may be eligible for. 2. Heard Mr.N.L.Rajah, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.R.Murali for Mr.M.Suresh Kumar, learned counsel for the respondents. 3. By consent, the writ petitions are taken up for final hearing. 4. The petitioner's Company engaged in the manufacture of Alloy Steel Castings & Forgings, was originally registered as M/s.Harihar Forging (P) Limited which was wound up and amalgamated with M/s.Harihar Alloy Castings (P) Limited, as per order of the Madras High court, dated 22.04.2010 in Company Petition Nos.43 and 44 of 2010, with effect from 01.04.2009. Thereafter, with effect from 13.07.2010 M/s.Harihar Alloy Castings (P) Ltd., was changed as M/s.Harihar Alloys (P) Ltd., and the Registrar of Companies has issued a certificate to that effect on 13.07.2010. 5. Based on the above facts, the petitioner made an application on 20.09.2010 to the Superintending Engineer, the first respondent herein, for change of name of M/s.Harihar Alloy Castings (p) Limited to M/s.Harihar Alloys (P) Ltd., enclosing the certificate issued by the Registrar of Companies and this was made in relation to High Tension Service Connection Nos.123 and 121 so that it can be transferred to the new company. That application has not been considered by the first respondent so far. 6. Further on 18.04.2011, M/s.Harihar Alloys (p) Ltd., filed an application before the Assistant Executive Engineer, Operation & Maintenance, the second respondent herein to provide temporary connection of 3 KW and that application came to be rejected by the second respondent on 04.05.2011 by stating that W.P(MD)No.14627 of 2010 filed by the petitioner against the respondent Board on another issue, is pending. 7. Aggrieved by the inaction on the part of the Superintending Engineer and the order passed by the second respondent refusing to grand 3 KW temporary power supply, the petitioner approached the Consumer Grievances Redressal Forum, which Forum took up both the grievances and passed an order on 30.06.2011 rejecting the plea of the petitioner on the ground that there is no consumer by name M/s.Harihar Alloys (P) Ltd., and therefore both the petitions were rejected. 8. Challenging the order of the second respondent, dated 04.05.2011 and the order of the third respondent, the present Writ petitions have been filed. 9. The rejection of petitioner's claim for change of name stems from misconception of law. The contention of the learned counsel for the https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 3 petitioner has to be accepted in view of the order passed in C.P.Nos.43 and 44 of 2010 by order dated 22.04.2010 and the proceedings of the Registrar of Companies, dated 13.07.2010. The authority cannot refuse to correct the name, in view of the above records. Therefore, the first respondent is directed to effect the name transfer forthwith as sought for by the petitioner, on submission of the order of Court in C.P.Nos.43 and 44 of 2010, dated 22.04.2010 and the proceedings of the Registrar of Companies, dated 13.07.2010, if it is not on record already. 10. Insofar as the temporary power supply of 3 KW is concerned, the reason for non-consideration of the above application citing the pendency of W.P(MD)No.14627 of 2010, is no reason at all. It is stated by the learned counsel for the petitioner that in that case, there is interim order against the respondent Board. The pendency of the Writ petition in another issue cannot be a ground to deny the right of the petitioner to get temporary connection, if law permits the same. No right of the individual can be curtailed citing the pendency of any other Court proceedings unless it has a bearing on the present issue, which is not the case here. It will amount to curtailing the legal right of an individual. Such a reason given by the respondent Authority is contrary to principles of law and arbitrary. 11. Accordingly, Mandamus is issued directing the second respondent to grant temporary power supply of 3 KW as prayed for by the petitioner, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 12. With the above direction, these Writ petitions are disposed of. No Costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions closed. Sd/- Assistant Registrar (RTI) /True copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar To 1.The Superintending Engineer, Pudukottai Electricity Distribution Circle, TANGEDCO(formerly TNEB), Pudukottai. 2.The Assistant Executive Engineer, Operation & Maintenance, Tamil Nadu Electricity Board(TNEB), Now TANGEDCO, Viralimalai - 621 316. 3.Consumer Grievances Redressal Forum, President, Pudukottai Distribution Circle, Pudukottai. +2cc to Mr.N.L.Raja, Advocate SR.23595 Pm SR : 20.07.2011 : 3p/6c : IT W.P.(MD)Nos.8006 and 8007 of 2011 19.07.2011 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/