Facts
The petitioner sought a writ of mandamus to restrain the respondents from collecting current-consumption charges, demand charges, and arrears until they paid or adjusted ₹6,42,360 allegedly due to it for 2025–2026.
Source reference: p. 2The parties submitted that the matter was covered by the Court’s earlier order in W.P. No. 38309 of 2024 and could be disposed of on the same terms.
Source reference: p. 2The earlier order directed adjustment of amounts due to the petitioner against its current-consumption and demand charges, and barred coercive disconnection until the adjustment was complete.
Source reference: pp. 4–5Issues
1. Whether the respondents should be directed to adjust the amount due to the petitioner against its current-consumption and demand charges.
Source reference: pp. 2, 5–62. Whether the respondents should be restrained from taking coercive steps to disconnect the petitioner’s electricity supply until the amount is adjusted.
Source reference: p. 5Law Applied
In exercising its jurisdiction under Article 226, the Court applied the approach adopted in *M/s. Rajaguru Spinning Mills P. Ltd. v. Tamil Nadu Electricity Regulatory Commission*, W.P. Nos. 6776 of 2020 batch, order dated 28 October 2021, as followed in subsequent cases.
Source reference: pp. 4–5That approach permits outstanding amounts payable by the electricity distribution company to be adjusted against the consumer’s current-consumption or open-access charges, and bars coercive disconnection while the adjustment remains incomplete.
Source reference: pp. 4–5The Court applied this precedent through its earlier order in W.P. No. 38309 of 2024.
Source reference: pp. 2–5Reasoning
The parties agreed that the petitioner’s case was covered by the prior order in W.P. No. 38309 of 2024.
Source reference: p. 2Relying on that order and the precedent it applied, the Court disposed of the petition on the same terms, without setting out a separate analysis of the petitioner’s claim.
Source reference: pp. 5–6The judgment does not independently restate the amount to be adjusted in its final paragraph.
Source reference: no citationHolding
The Court disposed of the writ petition on the same terms as the earlier order and made no order as to costs; the connected miscellaneous petition was closed.
The adopted terms provide for adjustment of the amount due against the petitioner’s current-consumption and demand charges, and prohibit coercive disconnection until the outstanding amount is adjusted.
Source reference: p. 5Original Court PDF
M/S.Sri Selvabathi Mills pvt ltdvsTamilnadu Electricity Regulatory Commission,
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in
