Facts
The petitioner sought a mandamus restraining the respondents from collecting current-consumption charges, demand charges, or arrears for its two HT service connections until the respondents paid or adjusted ₹7,81,343 allegedly due for electricity supplied between April 2025 and March 2026.
Source reference: p.2At admission, counsel for both sides submitted that the issue had been addressed in earlier orders of the Court, including the order in W.P. No. 38309 of 2024.
Source reference: p.2Issues
1. Whether the respondents should adjust the alleged outstanding amount of ₹7,81,343 against the petitioner’s current-consumption and demand charges.
Source reference: pp.2, 52. Whether the respondents should refrain from taking coercive steps to disconnect the petitioner’s electricity supply until the outstanding amount is fully adjusted.
Source reference: pp.4–5Law Applied
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 etc., decided on 28 October 2021, as reproduced in the earlier order discussed by the Court.
Source reference: pp.4–5Under that approach, outstanding amounts payable by the electricity utility may be adjusted against the consumer’s current-consumption or open-access charges, and coercive disconnection should not be undertaken until the outstanding amount is fully adjusted.
Source reference: pp.4–5The Court also relied on its subsequent orders applying that approach to similar cases.
Source reference: pp.3–5The petition was brought under Article 226 of the Constitution.
Source reference: p.2Reasoning
The Court considered the parties’ submission that the dispute was covered by prior decisions and adopted the same terms as the order reproduced from W.P. No. 38309 of 2024.
Source reference: pp.2–5Applying that approach, it directed adjustment of the amount payable to the petitioner against its current-consumption and demand charges, and protection from coercive disconnection until the amount was exhausted.
Source reference: p.5It did not separately examine the underlying entitlement or provide an independent assessment of the amount claimed.
Source reference: no citationHolding
The writ petition was disposed of on the same terms as the earlier order.
The respondents were directed to adjust ₹7,81,343 against the petitioner’s current-consumption and demand charges until fully adjusted, and not to take coercive steps to disconnect the petitioner’s power supply during that period.
Source reference: pp.5–6The connected miscellaneous petition was closed, with no order as to costs.
Source reference: p.5Original Court PDF
M/s.Jheeva Rekhaa TextilesvsTamilnadu Electricity Regulatory Commission,
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in
