Judgment :- 1. With the consent of both parties, the Writ Petition itself is taken up for final disposal, as the matter lies in narrow compass. 2. Heard both sides. 3. The petitioner is a High Tension Consumer. Already, the Current Consumption Deposit of Rs.37,71,055/- is available to the credit of the petitioner. It is seen that every year, an Additional Current Consumption Deposit has to be paid in accordance with Section 5(5)(ii)(a) of the Tamil Nadu Electricity Supply Code. 4. The petitioner has questioned the demand notice dated 15.4.2013 issued by the third respondent on the ground that the impugned notice is violative of the aforesaid Electricity Supply Code. 5. Rule 5(5)(ii)(a) of the Tamil Nadu Electricity Supply Code, 2004 is extracted hereunder: "The adequacy of security deposit shall be based on the periodicity of billing for the respective category. (a) For the categories of consumer under monthly billing, the security deposit is equivalent to two times of the monthly average of the electricity charges for the preceding twelve months prior to April." 6. As per the aforesaid clause, the average current consumption charges for the preceding 12 months from April 2012 to March 2013 has to be calculated and the amount shall be multiplied by 2. Instead of arriving at the average, the third respondent has taken the maximum current consumption charges, which also includes penalty. 7. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the third respondent is not correct in taking the maximum current consumption charges for arriving at the current consumption deposit. The learned counsel for the petitioner has also submitted that the penalty paid along with the current consumption charges shall be excluded for computing the current consumption deposit. 8. From a reading of Section 5(5)(ii)(a) of the Tamil Nadu Electricity Supply Code, it is clear that the third respondent has committed error in taking the maximum current consumption charges instead of arriving at the average current consumption charges of the preceding 12 months. Though the third respondent has given the current consumption charges for 12 months, the third respondent took into account the maximum current consumption charges. 9. Hence, the impugned order is liable to be interfered with and the matter is remanded back to the third respondent to work out the additional current consumption deposit in terms of Section 5(5)(ii)(a) of the Tamil Nadu Electricity Supply Code. 9. Hence, the impugned order is liable to be interfered with and the matter is remanded back to the third respondent to work out the additional current consumption deposit in terms of Section 5(5)(ii)(a) of the Tamil Nadu Electricity Supply Code. At that time, the third respondent shall also take into account as to whether the penalty charges along with the current consumption charges paid, will also be included for computation of current consumption deposit. Till the third respondent passes a fresh order, the third respondent cannot disconnect the electricity service connection available to the petitioner on the ground that the petitioner did not pay the additional current consumption deposit based on the impugned order that was quashed in this Writ Petition. 10. The Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs. The connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.