Judgment :- 1. Heard Mr. S. Nithyanandam learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr. P. Gunaraj learned counsel appearing for the respondents. What is challenged in the writ petition is the order of the Superintending Engineer, the 2nd respondent herein, in his proceedings dated 07.08.2012 in and by which the petitioner was directed to remit the compensation amount of Rs. 1,28,105/- and withdraw the writ petition in W.P. No: 14244 of 2010, seeking to quash the same and consequently, direct the respondents to receive the application of the petitioner and grant / sanction new HT Service connection for the unit of the petitioner company situated at Survey No: 374 and 383/1, Parpanachery Road, Thirumanur Block, Vanaravasi Village, Ariyalur Taluk and District as per the application registered. 2. According to the petitioner, it is a Company registered under the provisions of the Indian Companies Act, 1956. The main activities of the petitioner company is growing the seedling of oil palm, distributing the same to the farmers free of cost, purchase the produce i.e Oil Palm Fresh Fruit Bunches (FFBs) from the farmers and extract Palm Oil. The petitioner company is also engaged in the pre-project activity of cultivating the oil palm seeds from the stage of sprouts to seedling since 1995 and is running a crushing unit at Survey Nos: 374 and 383/1 Parpanachery Road, Thirumanu Block, Vanaravasi Village, Ariyalur Taluk and District since 2003. It is their claim that our country is self sufficient in almost all other food products to meet the requirements of our population. except in edible oil and pulses. Our country's edible oil production meets the requirements of the population to the extent of 40% alone. The remaining requirement is met by importing the edible oil from other countries. The Central Government and State Governments, considering the greater demand of the edible oil, jointly formulated a scheme known as Integrated Scheme on oil seeds, pulses, oilpalm and maize (ISOPOM) for promotion of oil palm in India. The said scheme is under the control and management of the agricultural departments of the Central and State Governments. The Scheme is funded entirely by the Central Government and respective State Governments in the ratio of 75:25 and it is totally a subsidy scheme. The said scheme is under the control and management of the agricultural departments of the Central and State Governments. The Scheme is funded entirely by the Central Government and respective State Governments in the ratio of 75:25 and it is totally a subsidy scheme. For the purpose of implementation and promotion of the said Scheme, Oil Palm Nursery has to be developed from seed to seedling with the average age of 13 to 14 months duration. The Oil Palm seeds are procured as sprouts from the Government of various other States or imported from other countries. Thereupon, the sprouts thus purchased are planted in poly bags with necessary nutrients and maintained by regular supply of water and fertilizer application. The entire cultivation of seedling from the stage of sprouts to the level of seedlings is sponsored and funded by the agricultural department of the State Government. The cultivation from the stage of sprouts to seedling is declared by the Governments as pre-project activity. The entire cultivation from sprouts to seedling is done on behalf of the agricultural department of the Tamil Nadu Government and the said activity is purely an agricultural activity. The seedlings are supplied to the eligible farmers on subsidy without any commercial nature. In this regard, the Tamil Nadu Government enacted an Act 34 of 1994, namely The Tamil Nadu Oil Palm (Regulation of Production and Processing) Act, 1994. Under Section 3 of the said Act, there is a Tamil Nadu Oil Palm Project Management Committee, which consists of the Secretary to the Government in-charge of Agriculture Department as the Chairman ex-officio and a representative of Department of Agriculture and Co-operation (Technology Mission on Oilseeds and Pulses) from Government of India. The entire scheme of the Act as well as the object of the Central and State Governments is that the growing of oil palm is an agricultural activity and the entire project is under the control and administration of the agricultural department. 3. While so, for the purpose of its pre-project activity, to cultivate the sprouts to seedling, the petitioner company approached one G. Rengasamy Reddiar, son of late. Govindasamy Reddiar, Udayarpalayam Taluk, Perambalur District, for lease of the lands owned by him in the village with irrigation facility. The said G.Rengasamy agreed to lease out the lands along with electricity connection to the petitioner company. Govindasamy Reddiar, Udayarpalayam Taluk, Perambalur District, for lease of the lands owned by him in the village with irrigation facility. The said G.Rengasamy agreed to lease out the lands along with electricity connection to the petitioner company. Accordingly, both the parties entered into a lease deed dated 4.5.2007 which was registered in S.R.O. Meensuriti as Doc. No: 488 of 2007 and thereby, the lands were taken on lease with electricity service connection for consideration. Since then, the petitioner company is cultivating the seedlings of Oil Palm in the lands without any hindrance. The Joint Director of Agriculture, Permbalur, by his proceedings in Lr. No: B2/4964/2006 dated 18.08.2006 and Lr. No: B2/3821/2007 dated 3.10.200 also duly intimated to the respondents that the petitioner / company had taken the said lands on lease for the implementation of the scheme, which is an agricultural activity, to promote the Nations edible oil productions under the Special Scheme and requested to maintain the electricity tariff extended to the farmers. As such, the agricultural department itself classified the activity as agricultural one and not otherwise. In the process of doing so, the produce from oil palm tree i.e. Oil palm fresh fruit bunches are purchased by the petitioner's company from the farmers for palm oil extraction. For the said purpose, the petitioner's company established a crushing unit at Vananaravasi Village, Ariyalur District. The said crushing unit has been established by the petitioner's company in 2003 and it has been all along functioning through generators. Being so, the petitioner / company applied for HT service connection for the above crushing unit in Form – 4 along with all required documents under clause 27 (3) of Tamil Nadu Electricity Distribution Code and the same was received by the respondents. With the said application, the petitioner company has enclosed all the required documents, such as, land ownership certificate and No Objection Certificate from the Revenue department, Memorandum of Association and Articles of Association of the petitioner company, Certificate of Incorporation, Certificate from the Department of Industries and Commerce of Tamil Nadu Government, N.O.C from the Pollution Control Board, etc. The application submitted by the petitioner / company is in compliance with the statutory requirement with all supporting documents. Pursuant to this, the 3rd respondent conducted a field inspection on 23.02.2012 and found the viability. The application submitted by the petitioner / company is in compliance with the statutory requirement with all supporting documents. Pursuant to this, the 3rd respondent conducted a field inspection on 23.02.2012 and found the viability. Thereupon, by his proceedings dated 23.2.2012, the 3rd respondent directed the petitioner to produce documents relating to the property on the northern side of the petitioner's company such as, field map, V.A.O. Certificate, N.O.C. from the owner of the property, for laying electricity post, etc. Accordingly, the petitioner company submitted all required documents. Though it was furnished by the petitioner, since February 2012, there is no progress and to their shock and surprise, the 2nd respondent, by the impugned proceedings in Lr. No: SE/PEDC/PBLR/AEE/DEV/F.CAUVERY/D.165/12 dated 07.08.2012 has rejected the request for new HT power connection of the petitioner by a cryptic order curiously stating that the petitioner company has filed W.P. No: 14244 of 2010 on the file of this Court and had obtained interim stay in respect of disconnection of LT agriculture service No: 47 of Thiru.G.Rengasamy in which compensation amount of Rs.1,28,105/- towards theft of energy is pending realization and further directed to remit the said amount and to withdraw the above W.P. for consideration of the petitioner's application for new HT service connection of the unit and returned the application submitted by the petitioner company. Aggrieved by the above order of the 2nd respondent, the petitioner has approached this Court on the ground that the order is ex-facie illegal, arbitrary, unjust and unreasonable. More over, according to the petitioner, the conditions imposed by the 2nd respondent in the impugned order for consideration of the petitioner's application for new HT connection for its unit is capricious exercise of power and hence, it sought to quash the same. 4. Mr. More over, according to the petitioner, the conditions imposed by the 2nd respondent in the impugned order for consideration of the petitioner's application for new HT connection for its unit is capricious exercise of power and hence, it sought to quash the same. 4. Mr. P. Gunaraj learned counsel appearing for the respondents, on instruction and on going through the material documents annexed in the typed set of papers, would submit that earlier the petitioner has filed a writ petition in W.P. No: 14244 of 2010 challenging the amount demanded towards theft of energy and there was an interim order granted by this Court and therefore, without the petitioner making any payment, it is not possible for the respondents to look into petitioner's claim for HT service connection more particularly, when the LT service connection itself is in question on the ground of theft of energy and therefore, according to him, the order of the respondents is in no way legally infirm and it is in order. 5. On the above background and pleadings, I have heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the material documents annexed in the typed set of documents. 6. The first and foremost contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the issue raised by the petitioner in W.P. No: 14244 of 2010 is about the alleged theft of energy and the petitioner is adjudicating the said writ petition because there is no theft of energy and that the petitioner is prepared to make the entire payment as demanded by the respondent in the event of the matter being decided against it. He would submit that the order impugned in the present writ petition rejecting the claim of the petitioner for HT service connection cannot be sustained because, all the statutory documents required for consideration of the petitioner's claim had already been furnished. 7. On the other hand, Mr. P.Gunaraj learned counsel appearing for the respondents would submit that the LT service connection given to the petitioner itself is in question on the ground of theft of energy and therefore, it is not proper for the respondents to consider the petitioner's request for HT service connection now and that is why, the impugned order was passed directing the petitioner to withdraw W.P. No : 14244 of 2010. 8. 8. A circumspection of the facts would reveal that the petitioner is engaged in the activity of growing the seedling of oil palm, distributing the same to the farmers free of cost, purchase the produce i.e Oil Palm Fresh Fruit Bunches (FFBs) from the farmers and extract Palm Oil. The petitioner company is also engaged in the pre-project activity of cultivating the oil palm seeds from the stage of sprouts to seedling since 1995 and is running a crushing unit at Survey Nos: 374 and 383/1 Parpanachery Road, Thirumanu Block, Vanaravasi Village, Ariyalur Taluk and District since 2003. The Central Government and State Governments, considering the greater demand of the edible oil, jointly formulated a scheme known as Integrated Scheme on Oil seeds, pulses, oilpalm and maize (ISOPOM) for promotion of oil palm in India. The said scheme is under the control and management of the agricultural departments of the Central and State Governments. The Scheme is funded entirely by the Central Government and respective State Governments in the ratio of 75 : 25 and it is totally a subsidy scheme. For the purpose of implementation and promotion of the said Scheme, Oil Palm Nursery has to be developed from seed to seedling with the average age of 13 to 14 months duration. The Oil Palm seeds are procured as sprouts from the Government of various other States or imported from other countries. Thereupon, the sprouts thus purchased are planted in poly bags with necessary nutrients and maintained by regular supply of water and fertilizer application. The entire cultivation of seedling from the stage of sprouts to the level of seedlings is sponsored and funded by the agricultural department of the State Government. The cultivation from the stage of sprouts to seedling is declared by the Governments as pre-project activity. The entire cultivation from sprouts to seedling is done on behalf of the agricultural department of the Tamil Nadu Government and the said activity is purely an agricultural activity. The seedlings are supplied to the eligible farmers on subsidy without any commercial nature. 9. So far, the petitioner had been carrying out these operations with the help of LT service connection granted in the name of the G. Rengasamy, with whom the petitioner company had entered into a lease deed on 04.05.2007. The seedlings are supplied to the eligible farmers on subsidy without any commercial nature. 9. So far, the petitioner had been carrying out these operations with the help of LT service connection granted in the name of the G. Rengasamy, with whom the petitioner company had entered into a lease deed on 04.05.2007. The petitioner / company applied for HT service connection for the above crushing unit in Form – 4 along with all required documents under clause 27 (3) of Tamil Nadu Electricity Distribution Code and the same was received by the respondents. With the said application, the petitioner company has enclosed all the required documents, such as, land ownership certificate and No Objection Certificate from the Revenue department, Memorandum of Association and Articles of Association of the petitioner company, Certificate of Incorporation, Certificate from the Department of Industries and Commerce of Tamil Nadu Government, N.O.C from the Pollution Control Board, etc. The application submitted by the petitioner / company is in compliance with the statutory requirement, with all supporting documents. Pursuant to this, the 3rd respondent conducted a field inspection on 23.02.2012 and found the viability. Thereupon, by his proceedings dated 23.2.2012, the 3rd respondent directed the petitioner to produce documents relating to the property on the northern side of the petitioner's company such as, field map, V.A.O. Certificate, N.O.C. from the owner of the property, for laying electricity post, etc. Accordingly, the petitioner company submitted all the required documents. After six months time, the respondents had now rejected the petitioner's application for HT service connection on two grounds namely, an amount of Rs.1,28,105/- claimed towards compensation for theft of energy is pending remittance and that a writ petition in W.P. No: 14244 of 2010 filed by the petitioner is pending before this Court and only on the petitioner making the said payment and withdrawing the writ petition in W.P. No: 14244 of 2010, its application for HT service connection can be considered. 10. It is true that, earlier, the petitioner has filed a writ petition before this Court in W.P. No: 14244 of 2010. The issue involved in the said writ petition relates to the demand of compensation amount of Rs.1,28,105/-on the alleged theft of energy in respect of LT agriculture service connection No: 47 standing in the name of the land owner G.Rengasamy. This Court has granted an order of interim stay in that writ petition. The issue involved in the said writ petition relates to the demand of compensation amount of Rs.1,28,105/-on the alleged theft of energy in respect of LT agriculture service connection No: 47 standing in the name of the land owner G.Rengasamy. This Court has granted an order of interim stay in that writ petition. Therefore, the question that has to be considered by this Court in the present writ petition is whether the rejection of the petitioner's application for HT service connection can be legally sustained or not ? 11. In this regard, it is pertinent to refer to Section 27 (3) of the Tamil Nadu Electricity Distribution Code which deals with the terms and conditions for supply of electricity. The Section reads thus, "27. Requisition for Supply of Energy : (3) The application for HT supply shall be in Form 4. Application for LT supply (except Agricultural category) including HT service shall be in Form 1 & 3 of Annexure III. Note: Requisition for supply of energy (Applications), even if incomplete, and irrespective of whether they are handed over in person or by post, should be acknowledged in writing. If they are in order, they shall be registered immediately and acknowledged. If they are incomplete, the defects should be indicated and returned without registration. " 12. From a reading of the above provisions, it is clear that the application for HT supply should be in Form 4 of Annexure III. Petitioner has stated that it has submitted its application for HT service connection in the required form along with the other documents. In fact, it is not even the case of the respondents that petitioner's application is neither incomplete nor bereft of any documents. Strangely, the respondents have rejected the petitioner's application on the grounds that the petitioner did not pay the sum of Rs.1,28,105/-which was the amount demanded by the respondents as compensation charges for alleged theft of energy and that petitioner should withdraw its writ petition in W.P. No: 14244 of 2010. 13. The application of the petitioner seeking HT service connection has to be considered independently. If the rules and regulations of the Tamil Nadu Electricity Distribution Code contemplate certain requirements, it is always open to the concerned authorities to demand the consumer to comply with those requirements thus enabling them to consider the application for new service connection. 13. The application of the petitioner seeking HT service connection has to be considered independently. If the rules and regulations of the Tamil Nadu Electricity Distribution Code contemplate certain requirements, it is always open to the concerned authorities to demand the consumer to comply with those requirements thus enabling them to consider the application for new service connection. They cannot demand the petitioner to withdraw its writ petition. Any person, aggrieved over an act of an authority, has every right to adjudicate the matter before a Court of law. In the case of this petitioner, earlier the respondents had demanded a sum of Rs. 1,28,105/-as compensation charges for the alleged theft of energy. Contending that it has not involved itself in any theft of energy petitioner has filed a writ petition in W.P. No: 14244 of 2010 before this Court and had obtained an order of interim stay. The authorities, who had alleged that the petitioner was involved in theft of energy, has to prove the same in W.P. No: 14244 of 2010 to sustain their demand of Rs. 1,28,105/-. The merits and demerits of such a demand can be decided only in that writ petition. Instead of defending that writ petition, it is unfortunate that the respondents have chosen to insist upon the petitioner to withdraw that writ petition and thereby, pay the sum of Rs. 1,28,105/- if its application for new HT service connection has to be considered by them. It is unfair on the part of the respondents to request any litigant to withdraw the case filed. Therefore, the impugned order, which directs the petitioner to withdraw the writ petition filed by it earlier, is legally unsustainable and it is not valid in law. 14. For the foregoing reasons, that part of the impugned order which demands the petitioner to withdraw W.P. No: 14244 of 2010 is quashed. At this juncture, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits before this Court that the petitioner is prepared to remit the said sum of Rs.1,28,105/-without prejudice to its right to contest the claim of theft of energy in W.P. No: 14244 of 2010. As the petitioner undertakes to remit the sum of Rs.1,28,105/- without prejudice to its right to contest W.P. No:14244 of 2010, it is open to the petitioner to pay the said sum. As the petitioner undertakes to remit the sum of Rs.1,28,105/- without prejudice to its right to contest W.P. No:14244 of 2010, it is open to the petitioner to pay the said sum. It is needless to state that, on such payment being made by the petitioner, the respondents shall consider petitioner's application for new HT service connection in accordance with law and on its own merits and pass necessary orders on it. 15. With the above observations, this writ petition is allowed in part to the extent indicated. Connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. There shall be no orders as to costs.