IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED 15.02.2010 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.JAICHANDREN W.P. NO.3002 OF 2010 and M.P.No.1 of 2010 M/s.Gainup Industries India (P) Ltd., Rep. by its General Manager, R.Sivanandan, Mill Quarters, Sitheravu Village, Ottupatty (P.O.), Dindigul. .. Petitioner Versus 1.Tamil Nadu Electricity Regulatory Commission 19-A, Rukmini Lakshmipathy Salai, (Marshall's Road), Egmore, Chennai – 600 008 rep. by its Secretary. 2.The Chairman, Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, 144, Anna Salai, Chennai – 600 002. 3.The Superintending Engineer, Dindigul Electricity Distribution Circle (DEDC), Dindigul. .. Respondents PRAYER: Writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of The Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Certiorari calling for the records of the third respondent in his notice Lr.No.SE/DEDC/DGL/AO/Rev/D.No.1398/2010 dated 23.01.2010 and quash the same in so far as it relates to levy of penalty for exceeding quota during evening peak hour as illegal, arbitrary and against the Orders of the first respondent made in Miscellaneous Petition No.42 of 2008 dated 28.11.2008 more specifically made in paragraph 33 consequently adjusted the penalty already paid by the petitioner in the future bill . For Petitioner : Mr.R.Nithyanandam For Respondents : Mr.A.Selvendran, (for R2) Mr.P.Srinivas, (for R3) * * * * * https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ O R D E R Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned counsels appearing for the respondents. 2. This writ petition has been filed praying for a writ of Certiorari to call for and quash the notice issued by the third respondent, with regard to the levying of penalty, for exceeding the quota during evening peak hours. The main grievance of the petitioner is that no opportunity of hearing had been afforded to the petitioner, by the third respondent, before the impugned notice had been issued. Even though, this Court had, passed earlier orders, with regard to levying of penalty for exceeding the quota during evening peak hours, wherein the respondent Tamil Nadu Electricity Board had been permitted to issue fresh notice to the petitioner therein and to give them an opportunity of hearing, no such opportunity of hearing had been given to the petitioner in the present case, before the impugned notice had been issued. 3.In such circumstances, the impugned notice, dated 23.01.2010, issued by the third respondent is set aside and the petitioner is permitted to issue fresh notice and to afford an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, before passing final orders, with regard to levying of peak hour penalty, for exceeding the quota during the evening peak hours. 4. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of, with the above directions. No costs. Consequently, connected M.P. is closed. vs/lan Sd/- Asst. Registrar //True Copy// Sub Asst. Registrar To 1.The Secretary, Tamil Nadu Electricity Regulatory Commission, 19-A, Rukmini Lakshmipathy Salai, (Marshal Road), Egmore, Chennai – 600 008. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2.The Chairman, Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, 144, Anna Salai, Chennai – 600 002. 3.The Superintending Engineer, Dindigul Electricity Distribution Circle (DEDC), Dindigul. + 1 cc to Mr. R. Nithyanandam, Advocate SR No.9896 W.P. NO.3002 OF 2010 and M.P.No.1 of 2010 KU(CO) SR/16.2.2010 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/