Amirthaalaksshmi Spinning Mills Private Limited, represented by Director, A. D. Balakirushnen v. Secretary, The Government of Tamil Nadu, Energy Department
2012-04-11
R.SUDHAKAR
body2012
DigiLaw.ai
Judgment :- 1. Writ Petition is filed praying to issue a Writ of Certiorari, calling for the records of the third respondent's letter bearing Lr.No.A/Cs.Br/HT/A2/F.HT SC No.111/D.582-1/2012, dated 16.03.2012 issued for the petitioner, quash the same as being violative of the Tamil Nadu Tax on Sale or Consumption of Electricity Act, 2003 and also unconstitutional. 2. Mr.V.Jayaprakash Narayanan, learned Additional Government Pleader takes notice on behalf of the first respondent and Mr.S.K.Rameshwar, learned counsel takes notice on behalf of the respondents 2 and 3. By consent, the writ petition is taken up for final disposal. 3. Similar issue was considered by a Division Bench of this Court in W.P.No.26190 of 2011 on 14.11.2011. The relevant portion of the order reads as follows:- “3. The question as to whether the demand could be made for a period beyond four years prior to the date of demand and as to whether at the time of demand, the provisions of Section 2(12) read with Section 3 relating to the net charge had been duly taken into consideration or not, are all matters not to be adjudicated at this point of time, for the simple reason that the impugned order is liable to be set aside on the sole ground that before such a demand is made, the petitioner consumer has not been afforded an opportunity as required under Section 9 of the Act. On the said ground alone, we are inclined to interfere with the impugned order. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed, the impugned order will be treated as a show cause notice and the petitioner is at liberty to make objections on all the available grounds including the grounds which we have referred to in this order, in a period of fifteen days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order before the third respondent. In the event such objections are received, the third respondent shall consider the same and after affording opportunity to the petitioner, pass a fresh order of demand. We also make it clear that in the event the petitioner fails to make any objection within the period stipulated in this order, the third respondent is entitled to proceed further on the basis of the impugned demand.
We also make it clear that in the event the petitioner fails to make any objection within the period stipulated in this order, the third respondent is entitled to proceed further on the basis of the impugned demand. As we have directed that the impugned order shall be treated to be one of show cause notice, till such time final order is passed, in the event of receipt of objection as directed, the third respondent shall not disconnect the electricity service connection of the petitioner. We further make it clear that this Order is with reference to the demand made in the impugned proceedings. With these observations and directions, the writ petition is allowed. Consequently M.P.Nos.1 & 2 are closed. No costs.” 4. Mr.S.K.Rameshwar, learned counsel for the respondents 2 and 3 states that the issue directly covers the issue in the present writ petition. 5. In such view of the matter, the writ petition is allowed in terms of the above decision. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.