Judgment 1. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, as well as the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents. 2. It has been stated that the petitioner Industry is a 'Continuous Process Industry', involved in the manufacture of steel angles and other such items, having high tension electricity supply in H.T SC No.1487. The petitioner Industry has been sanctioned high tension supply of 410 K.V.A., by the second respondent, after having complied with all the necessary formalities. The petitioner Industry has been providing employment for nearly one hundred persons. 3. The petitioner Industry had been established with a loan of 10 crores, borrowed from various Banks and Private Financial Institutions. The petitioner Industry had applied for the Additional Demand of 990 K.V.A., on 23.11.2012, over and above the Existing Sanctioned Demand of 410 K.V.A. However, the second respondent had issued the impugned letter, dated 4.1.2013, stating that the request for Additional Demand of 990 K.V.A. would be considered, only after the realisation of the E-Tax arrears due to the Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation Limited, relating to H.T. SC Nos.1777, 1816 and 1951. The second respondent had claimed a sum of Rs.31,97,168/- towards the alleged E-Tax arrears. 4. It has been further stated that, with reference to the E-Tax arrears, the Supreme Court was pleased to grant interim orders, on 4.10.2012, in S.L.P.(C) Nos.28143, 28144 and 28146 of 2012. As such, it is not open to the second respondent to claim that the request of the petitioner Industry, for extension of supply for an Additional Demand of 990 K.V.A., in addition to the existing demand of 410 K.V.A. would be considered only after the realisation of the alleged E-Tax arrears relating to H.T. SC No.1487. 5. No counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respondents. 6. The learned counsel appearing for the respondents had submitted that Regulation 50 (3) of the Tamil Nadu Electricity Distribution Code, deals with the disputes between the supplier and the consumer of Electricity. The consumer ought to have approached the Tamil Nadu Electricity Regulatory Commission, instead of approaching this Court, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 7. 6. The learned counsel appearing for the respondents had submitted that Regulation 50 (3) of the Tamil Nadu Electricity Distribution Code, deals with the disputes between the supplier and the consumer of Electricity. The consumer ought to have approached the Tamil Nadu Electricity Regulatory Commission, instead of approaching this Court, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 7. It has also been stated that the request of the petitioner Industry for the additional demand would be considered only after the realisation of the E-Tax arrears, payable to the Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation Limited, by the petitioner, relating to H.T. SC Nos.1777, 1816 and 1951, as per the Tamil Nadu Electricity Regulatory Commission Regulations and the Tamil Nadu Electricity Regulatory Commission Distribution Code. As such, the present writ petition, filed by the petitioner, is devoid of merits and therefore, it is liable to be dismissed. 8. In view of the submissions made by the learned counsels appearing for the petitioner, as well as the respondents, and on a perusal of the records available, this Court is of the considered view that the claim of the second respondent that the request of the petitioner Industry, for the additional demand, would be considered only after the realisation of the E-Tax arrears, relating to H.T. SC Nos.1777, 1816 and 1951, cannot be sustained in the eye of law. 9. It is noted that the Supreme Court had granted interim orders, with regard to E-Tax arrears, in S.L.P.(C) Nos.28143, 28144 and 28146 of 2012. While so, it is not open to the second respondent to state that the claim of the petitioner Industry, with regard to the additional demand of 990 K.V.A., in addition to the existing demand of 410 K.V.A., would be considered only on the petitioner Industry clearing the E-Tax arrears of Rs.31,97,168/-. 10. In such view of the matter, the impugned order of the second respondent, dated 4.1.2013, is set aside. 10. In such view of the matter, the impugned order of the second respondent, dated 4.1.2013, is set aside. The second respondent is directed to consider the request of the petitioner, relating to the additional demand of 990 K.V.A., in addition to the existing demand of 410 K.V.A., relating to H.T. SC Nos.1777, 1816 and 1951, based on the application of the petitioner, dated 23.11.2012, if the petitioner Industry is found to be otherwise eligible for the same, and on the petitioner Industry paying the necessary charges, within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed. No costs. Connected M.P. Nos.1 and 2 of 2013 are closed.