Case Note & Summary
The case involves two writ appeals filed by the Tamil Nadu Electricity Board against a common order dated 25.07.2022 in W.P.Nos.36209 of 2007 and 23556 of 2008, where the writ Court allowed the petitions filed by Khivaraj Tech Park Private Limited challenging demand notices for monthly minimum charges under Clause 31 of TNERC Electricity Distribution Code. The respondent had obtained HT supply connection but did not commence consumption. The Board issued demand notices on 28.04.2007 and 07.08.2007 stating that Board side works were completed and requiring the respondent to avail supply within three months, failing which monthly minimum charges would be payable. The respondent disputed the readiness and completion of works, leading to the writ petitions. The writ Court allowed the petitions, quashing the demand notices. The Board appealed, arguing that disputed facts regarding readiness to avail supply cannot be decided in writ jurisdiction. The High Court agreed, holding that the writ Court erred in entertaining the petitions as there were serious disputed questions of fact requiring trial and evidence. The court set aside the writ order and remanded the matter to the civil court for adjudication, granting liberty to the respondent to file a civil suit. The appeals were allowed, and the parties were directed to bear their own costs.
Headnote
A) Constitutional Law - Writ Jurisdiction - Disputed Questions of Fact - Article 226 of the Constitution of India - The High Court held that disputed facts regarding readiness to avail electricity supply cannot be adjudicated in writ proceedings, as they require trial and evidence. The writ Court ought not to have entertained the petitions and should have relegated the parties to civil court. (Paras 3-5) B) Electricity Law - Monthly Minimum Charges - Clause 31 of TNERC Electricity Distribution Code - The court noted that the demand for monthly minimum charges is based on contractual agreement between parties under Clause 31. The disputed facts regarding completion of Board side works and readiness of the respondent to avail supply are crucial for recovery. (Paras 2-4) C) Civil Procedure - Alternative Remedy - Existence of Civil Suit - The court held that when disputed facts exist, the appropriate remedy is a civil suit, not a writ petition under Article 226. The writ Court's order was set aside and the parties were relegated to civil court. (Paras 5-6)
Issue of Consideration
Whether disputed facts regarding readiness to avail electricity supply can be adjudicated in writ proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, and whether the Electricity Board is entitled to recover monthly minimum charges under Clause 31 of TNERC Electricity Distribution Code.
Final Decision
The writ appeals are allowed. The common order dated 25.07.2022 in W.P.Nos.36209 of 2007 and 23556 of 2008 is set aside. The respondent is at liberty to file a civil suit before the competent civil court. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.
Law Points
- Writ jurisdiction not appropriate for disputed facts
- Monthly minimum charges under Clause 31 of TNERC Electricity Distribution Code
- Remedy of civil suit available
