IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 28.02.2011 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.RAJA W.P.No.29348 of 2010 and M.P.No.1 of 2010 Sreekal Tea Industry Rep. by its Managing Partner B. Jagdish Gottacombai Tuttapallam (PO) The Nilgiris ... Petitioner Versus 1.Tamil Nadu Electricity Board Rep. by its Chairman No. 800, Anna Salai Chennai – 600 002 2.The Superintending Engineer Nilgiris Electricity Distribution Circle Tamil Nadu Electricity Board The Nilgiris 3.The Assistant Engineer Tamil Nadu Electricity Board Aravenu The Nilgiris ... Respondents Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India praying for the issue of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for records from the third respondent in Lr.No.AE/O&M/AVN/F.LTCT/D.No:284/10 dated 13.12.2010 and quash the demand insofar as it relates for the sum of Rs.9,12,454/- and direct the respondents to give reconnection to the petitioner industry in S.C.No.260, Kottacombai, Tuttapallam within the Nilgiri Electricity Distribution Circle. For Petitioner : Mr. M. Kamalanathan For Respondents : Mr. J. Ravindran https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ ORDER The present Writ Petition has been filed by the petitioner, seeking for issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for records from the third respondent in Lr.No.AE/O&M/AVN/F.LTCT/D.No:284/10 dated 13.12.2010 and quash the demand insofar as it relates for the sum of Rs.9,12,454/- and direct the respondents to give reconnection to the petitioner industry in S.C.No.260, Kottacombai, Tuttapallam within the Nilgiri Electricity Distribution Circle. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the Sreekal Tea Industry, represented by its Managing Director, is a consumer under the respondents having L.T.C.T. Service Connection in S.C.No.260. The sanctioned load is 125 KVA and Connected Load is 150 Hp. From the beginning the petitioner was assessed under two part tariff. Subsequently, after the order of the Tamil Nadu Electricity Regulatory Commission in T.P.No.1 of 2002, the two part tariff came to be merged with L.T.C.T. viz., III-B under clause 9 of the order of the Commission. After that, from 16.03.2003 the petitioner was assessed under L.T.C.T. III category. 3. While so, in the year 2003, the respondents changed the Electricity Meter in the petitioner industry. Even thereafter, changing the meter, the said meter was measuring in KVA and not in KW till 07.04.2004. While converting the meter reading from KVA to KW, there was a dispute and in connection with the said dispute, the petitioner filed a Writ Petition in W.P.No.23659 of 2005 on the file of this Court and along with the Writ Petition, the petitioner had also taken out a petition for interim stay of demand. This Court granted interim stay on condition that the petitioner shall pay 50% of the disputed amount. Aggrieved by the said order, the petitioner preferred an appeal in W.A.No.1963 of 2005 and the Division Bench has also granted interim stay thereon. 4. When the matter was posted for final hearing, for various reasons the petitioner was not able to continue production. Therefore, the petitioner's Industry was closed on 23.11.2005. As a result, there was a sum of Rs.1,65,575.53 to be paid by the petitioner towards current consumption charges and for the non- payment of the said amount, the service connection was disconnected. 5. Now, the petitioner is desired to revive the factory and made a request to the third respondent for reconnection of the power supply. The third respondent after receiving the request from the petitioner, by its letter in reference No.Lr.No.AE/O&M/AVN/F.LTCT/D.No:284/10, dated 13.12.2010 informed the petitioner that the petitioner-industry is under disconnection https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ from 23.11.2005 and there is an audit case pending on the file of this Court from 2005 for the non-payment of existing demand charges to the extent of Rs.9,12,454/- and only after the disposal or withdrawal of the said case, the application of the petitioner will be considered as per the Rules in force. However, the request of the petitioner was considered. 6. Today when the case was taken up, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner pressed the prayer on the ground that the impugned order was passed against the principles of natural justice for the reason that the third respondent failed to note the pendency of the case and again declined to give reconnection of electricity supply. Replying to the said submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, the learned standing counsel for the respondents, by bringing to the notice of this Court a break-up particulars of payment to be made by the petitioner, submitted that if the petitioner is prepared to clear the entire arrears of Rs.3,23,826/-, the service connection will be treated as new service connection as per the TNERC. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner after receiving a copy of the letter dated 02.02.2011, produced before me in the Court, accepted to clear the entire amount of Rs.3,23,826/-. 7. In view of the fact that the petitioner has accepted to pay and clear the entire amount of Rs.3,23,836/- in terms of the letter dated 02.02.2011, it is made clear that the petitioner shall pay a sum of Rs.3,23,836/- within in a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of this order. Therefore, this Court directs the respondents to receive the said amount and within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of the said amount, reconnection shall be given to the petitioner by the respondents. 8. With the above observation, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed. smn Sd/- Asst. Registrar //True Copy// Sub Asst. Registrar https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ To 1.The Chairman Tamil Nadu Electricity Board No. 800, Anna Salai Chennai – 600 002 2.The Superintending Engineer Nilgiris Electricity Distribution Circle Tamil Nadu Electricity Board The Nilgiris 3.The Assistant Engineer Tamil Nadu Electricity Board Aravenu The Nilgiris + 1 cc to Mr. M. Kamalanathan, Advocate SR No.14338 W.P.No.29348 of 2010 SV(CO) SR/31.3.2011 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/