S. Raghavan vs Assistant Engineer, Tamil Nadu Electricity Board

M. Venugopal, J.—The Petitioner has filed the present Writ Petition seeking the relief of Certiorarified Mandamus in calling for the records of the Respondent pertaining to the letter bearing No. A.E./Town/Aran/Va. Me/ A. No. 53 dated 4.6.2008(served on 1.8.2008) quash the same and issue resultant directions to the Respondent to receive the amount due from the Petitioner in respect of the current consumption charge for the month of August 2008 and for future consumption.

According to the learned Counsel for the Petitioner, the Petitioner has constructed a tiled shed in the land measuring two cents at Pudukkottai Road, Aranthangi Town, which belongs to one Aameen Ammal and has been running the Ice Company on rent for the past twenty years in the name and style of S.R. Ice Company. The service connection in S.C. No. 417 in respect of the tiled shed is in the name of the Petitioner and electricity consumption charge is being paid at regular interval without having any due to the Electricity Board.

The stand of the Petitioner is that Ice Company will function for six months and for another six months it will not function like that of summer season. During the winter season, the current consumption will be very much less. The Petitioner has received a letter bearing No. A.E./Town/Aran/Va. Me/ A. No. 53 dated 4.6.2008(served on 1.8.2008), demanding a sum of Rs. 45, 685/- based on the audit report pertaining to the period from 07/05 to 01/07 and directed the Petitioner to pay the aforesaid amount within seven days from the date of receipt of the impugned letter.

The learned Counsel for the Petitioner contends that the impugned demand notice of the Respondent dated 4.6.20089 demanding a sum of Rs. 45,685/0 to the Petitioner has been issued in violation of the statutory provisions illegally and also arbitrarily. Moreover, the Petitioner has not been given any opportunity of hearing before passing of the impugned letter dated 4.6.2008, which according to the Petitioner has civil consequences.

A perusal of the demand notice dated 4.6.2008 issued by the Assistant Engineer, Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, Arantangi Town, Pudukkottai District, shows that a sum of Rs. 45,685/-has been demanded from the Petitioner based on audit report and in the said letter it is mentioned that the Petitioner has been informed directly to pay the aforesaid amount of Rs. 45,685/-but the same has not been paid and further the Petitioner has been required to pay the aforesaid sum of Rs. 45,685/-within seven days and further, directed to avoid disconnection of electricity.

It is to be pointed out that in M.P.(MD) No. 1 of 2008 on 14.8.2008 this Court has passed an order of interim stay on condition that the Petitioner shall deposit 50% of the demand amount within a period of two weeks. According to the learned Counsel for the Petitioner, he has complied with the said conditional order in M.P.(MD) No. 1 of 2008 dated 14.8.2008.

In the instant case on hand, the Respondent/Assistant Engineer, Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, Arantangi Town has issued the demand letter dated 4.6.2008 addressed to the Petitioner claiming a sum of Rs. 45,685/-being the audit balance amount to be paid by the Petitioner for the period from 07/05 to 01/07. At this Juncture, a scrutiny of the said letter dated 4.6.2008 of the Respondent shows that the Petitioner has been informed directly to pay the sum of Rs. 45,685/-mentioned by the Respondent and that amount has not been paid till date. There is no express or implied indication in the letter of the Respondent dated 4.6.2008 to the effect that on particular date in which communication/letter of the Respondent/Board the Petitioner has been required to pay the amount of Rs. 45,685/-claimed by the audit as balance amount to be paid by the Petitioner. In short, the letter of the Respondent/Electricity Board dated 4.6.2008 is conspicuously silent as to its earlier communication or intimation in this regard.

The Petitioner has been required to pay a sum of Rs. 45,685/-claimed by the audit towards balance amount as per letter dated 4.6.2008 of the Respondent and this letter has not spelt out necessary details as to how the Petitioner is liable to pay a sum of Rs. 45,685/-claimed by the Respondent. The principle of natural justice required that a person must be provided with a reasonable opportunity and also when he has been required to pay the said amount of Rs. 45,685/-claimed by the Respondent, then in that event, this Court is of the considered opinion that all necessary details as to how a sum of Rs. 45,685/-has been arrived at by the audit or by the Respondent must be spelt out in the letter of the Respondent dated 4.6.2008. But that sort of details are not to be found in the said letter dated 4.6.2008 of the Respondent.

Therefore, this Court on the basis of Equity, Fair Play, as a Equitable Relief and even as a matter of prudence directs the Respondent/Electricity Board to issue a fresh letter of demand specifying a sum of Rs. 45,685/-or any other amount paid by the Petitioner with necessary qualitative and quantitative details including the one as to how or in what manner audit report has come to the conclusion that the Petitioner is liable to pay a sum of Rs. 45,685/-to the Respondent. As soon as a fresh letter of demand is issued by the Respondent to the Petitioner in this regard, the Petitioner on receipt of the same is directed to file the objections/counter within ten days thereafter. After perusing objections or receiving the response or counter as the case may be it is open to the Respondent/ Electricity Board to pass a dispassionate order as regards the amount to be paid by the Petitioner if any and this order has to be passed at an earlier date of course after affording necessary opportunities to the Petitioner and the Respondent further directed to pass appropriate orders uninfluenced and untrammeled by any of the observations made by this Court in this Writ Petition while issuing a order of demand notice by the Respondent/Electricity Board to the Petitioner. The Respondent/ Electricity Board is to keep in mind or take into account of 50% of the amount paid by the Petitioner as per the order made in M.P. (MD) No. 1 of 2008 on 14.8.2008 passed by this Court and to act or proceed further in the manner known to law and in accordance with law.

With these directions, the Writ Petition is disposed of. Consequently, connected M. Ps are also closed. No costs.