K. Suguna vs Tamil Nadu Electricity Generation and Others

V. Dhanapalan, J.—Heard Mr. I. Abrar Mohammed Abdullah, learned counsel appearing for Mr. R. Subramanian, learned counsel for the

petitioner; Mr. S.K. Raameshwar, learned counsel appearing for respondents 1 to 4 and Mr. K. Gunasekar, learned Senior Central Government

Standing Counsel appearing for the 5th respondent. This Writ Petition is filed for a direction to the respondents to receive the proportionate

amount of Rs. 4,02,267/- payable with respect to the land purchased by the petitioner and grant service connection within a time frame.

According to the petitioner, she is the owner of a portion of the land measuring an extent of 74 cents situated in S.F. Nos. 127/3 and 126/2A1

of Pongalur Village, Palladam Taluk, Tirupur District. She purchased the said lands as per Certificate of Sale of Immovable Property issued by the

Recovery Officer, Employees Provident Fund Organisation, Coimbatore for a sum of Rs. 35,70,000/-. The said property forms part of the total

extent of 6.00 acres of land comprised in S.F. Nos. 126/2A1 and 127/3 and the said lands originally belonged to M/s. Venkatram Textiles Pvt.

Ltd. The Certificate of Sale of the immovable property has been issued by the Recovery Officer, Employees Fund Organization, Ministry of

Labour, Government of India on 18.06.2010 and subsequently registered as Document No. 14403 of 2010 on the file of the Sub-Registrar

Office, Palladam.

2.1. Pursuant to the said purchase, in order to maintain the said lands and to develop them, the petitioner applied for a temporary Electrical Supply

Connection by way of the prescribed application to the 4th respondent herein vide application dated 14.06.2012. In response to the above said

application of the petitioner, the 4th respondent sent a reply stating that originally the service connection with respect to the said lands stood in the

name of M/s. Venkatraman Textiles, which has been suspended due to pendency of arrears amount to the tune of Rs. 32,92,504/- and that any

further application for service connection and its consideration could be made only after the said arrears amount have been cleared.

2.2. It is the case of the petitioner that she purchased 0.74 acres out of 6.00 acres of land which was originally owned by M/s. Venkatraman

Textiles and therefore, she is liable to pay the dues only in proportion to the extent of the property purchased by him as per the Notification No.

TNERC/SC/7-25, dated 18.03.2011 of the Tamil Nadu Electricity Regulatory Commission, making amendments to Clause 17 of the Principal

Code, which makes it clear that the dues are to be divided proportionally as per the sub-divided portion and the service connection shall be given

after the dues with respect to the said share have been paid.

2.3. The petitioner would state that she is willing to pay his share of the sub-divided portion which comes to the tune of Rs. 4,02,267/- in

proportion to the total amount of Rs. 32,92,504/-. Hence, having no other alternative, the petitioner has come up with the present Writ Petition.

In the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the respondents/TANGEDCO, it is stated as follows:

3.1. The High Tension Service Connection No. 37 had been effected in the name of M/s. Venkatram Textiles Pvt. Ltd., to the premises situated in

S.F. No. 127/3 and 126/2A1 of Pongalur Village, Palladam Taluk of Coimbatore District. The electrical supply had been effected to the premises

situated in S.F. Nos. 127/3 and 126/2A1 and not to the entire lands stated to be measuring 6.00 acres.

3.2. The said High Tension Consumer M/s. Venkatram Textiles Pvt. Ltd. defaulted in payment of the electricity charges and therefore the supply of

service connection No. 37 was disconnected as per the terms and conditions of supply of electricity then in force. The current consumption

charges from 2/2000 to 10/2000 for Rs. 14,50,644/- was outstanding as on the date of termination of agreement. The Company neither came for

reconnection nor paid the current consumption arrears since then. In spite of repeated demand notices issued by the respondents, the defaulter

M/s. Venkatram Textiles Pvt. Ltd. has not cleared the outstanding dues. Therefore, action under Tamil Nadu Recovery of Dues (Revenue

Recovery) Act, 1978, was proceeded. In accordance with the provisions of the said Act, attachment of the properties owned by the defaulted

consumer M/s. Venkatram Textiles Pvt. Ltd. was requested to the Sub-Registrar, Tirupur, by a Letter dated 15.04.2004. Again on understanding

the attachment proceedings to be issued by the Recovery Officer, Employees Provident Fund Organization, Coimbatore, letter dated 30.09.2009

was also issued for inclusion of the current consumption arrears against the immovable properties of the defaulted consumer, M/s. Venkatram

Textiles Pvt. Ltd.

3.3. As per Regulations 5(4) under chapter 2 of the Tamil Nadu Electricity Supply Code, if any consumer neglects to pay any bill by the due date,

she shall be liable to pay belated payment surcharge from the day following the due date for payment. As per Regulation 17(2) of the Supply

Code, the consumer is liable to pay the arrears of current consumption charges or any other sum due to the Licensee on the date of disconnection

and meter rent, if any, up to the date of termination of agreement and belated payment surcharge upto the date of payment.

3.4. As on the date of termination of agreement, i.e. October 2000, the current consumption arrears stood at Rs. 14,50,644/-. The said amount

together with the belated payment surcharge as on the date of filing of the above writ petition before this Court works out to Rs. 49,24,478/- as

below:

3.5. The total area of 1.08 landed property with land and buildings of M/s. Venkatram Textiles Pvt. Ltd. had been attached for recovery of arrears

by the Recovery Officer, Employees Provident Fund Organization, Coimbatore. Out of the total area of 1.08 acres, the petitioner herein had

purchased land and buildings to the extent of 74 cents as per Certificate of Sale of Immovable property dated 18.06.2010 issued by the Recovery

Officer, Employees Provident Fund, Coimbatore.

3.6. The averment of the petitioner that the premises of the High Tension S.C. No. 37 consists 6.00 acres of land is false and bereft of truth. The

petitioner had presumably averred the above statement as per letter dated 15.04.2004 issued to the Sub-Registrar, Tirupur by the

respondents/TANGEDCO, which has been issued requesting encumbrance not only on the premises of High Tension S.C. No. 37, but on all the

properties owned by the defaulted consumer, M/s. Venkatram Textiles Pvt. Ltd. and for issuance of Certificate of Encumbrance in case of sale of

such properties.

3.7. The petitioner being an intending consumer for electrical supply has to pay the dues attributed to the landed property purchased by her. Only

on clearance of the outstanding dues against the disconnected High Tension Service Connection No. 37, a new supply could be effected both as

per clause 6.10 of terms and conditions of supply of electricity and clause 17 of the Tamil Nadu Electricity Supply (Amendment) Code, 2011.

According to these provisions, the proportionate dues attributable to the petitioner herein are as below:

Thus, the petitioner had to clear the proportionate dues of Rs. 33,74,252.00 as per the provisions referred to above for effecting a new electrical

supply.

3.8. The petitioner has not given any proof of the premises of the High Tension S.C. No. 37 comprising 6.00 acres. The extent of 6.00 acres

alleged to be the property of S.C. No. 37 has to be proved by the petitioner. Without producing the concrete evidence of the above statement, the

petitioner is not justified in declaring the proportionate dues at Rs. 4,02,267/-. Further, the total dues claimed at Rs. 32,92,504/- is outstanding as

on 31.01.2006. The petitioner had conveniently evaded further dues on belated payment surcharge upto the date of clearance of arrears. The

impugned letter dated 14.06.2012 issued by the 4th respondent clearly states that the arrears amounts to Rs. 32,92,504/- approximately and

hence, it is not final. The Regulations of the Commissioner''s Supply Code could not be violated upon with impunity by the

respondents/TANGEDCO.

As such, the petitioner''s request for extension of electrical supply could be considered only on payment of the proportionate dues of Rs.

33,74,252.00.

3.9. The amended clause 17 of the Tamil Nadu Electricity Supply, which came into effect from 18.03.2011 is very categoric that reconnection of

disconnected/dismantled service connections or new service connections to the premises in default of payment of dues shall be made only after

payment of such dues attributed to such premises by the applicant. The respondents/TANGEDCO are lawfully entitled to collect the proportionate

dues of Rs. 33,74,252/- of the pending current consumption arrears left unpaid before effecting new electrical supply to the petitioner. On receipt

of the above proportionate dues from the petitioner, the new electrical supply could be effected.

The 3rd respondent has filed additional counter affidavit on behalf of respondents/TANGEDCO, stating as follows:

4.1. On directions from this Court, the 3rd respondent was directed to get necessary records from the Recovery Officer of the Employees

Provident Fund Organization and to clarify the position as to what is the extent of land covered by Survey No. 127/3 at Pongalur Village, Trichy

Main Road, Pongalur Post, to which Service Connection No. 37 was given.

4.2. The records from the Recovery Officer of the Employees Provident Fund Organization, Coimbatore have been obtained in letter No.

TN/RO-CBE/Recovery/21516/2013, dated 04.03.2013. As per the details furnished in the letter of the Recovery Officer of the Employees Fund,

Coimbatore, the following extent of lands are covered by Survey No. 127/3 of Pongalur Village:

In the total extent of 73.53 cents in S.F. No. 127/3, the petitioner had purchased 62=cents under Part II of the property.

4.3. As per the records given by the Recovery Officer, Employees Provident Fund, Coimbatore, the extent of property acquired by the petitioner

herein is 85% of the total extent of 73.53 cents. As per clause 6.10 of the terms and conditions of supply of Electricity and as per clause 17 of the

Tamil Nadu Electricity Supply Code, the petitioner is lawfully liable to pay proportionate 85% of the total dues attributable to the property.

4.4. As per the records given by the Recovery Officer, Employees Provident Fund, Coimbatore, the petitioner is liable to pay the proportionate

dues of Rs. 41,85,806/- (i.e. 49,24,478.00 x 85%) for effecting electrical supply to the property.

4.5. In view of the above, the respondents/TANGEDCO pray for a direction to the petitioner to clear the proportionate dues as per clause 6.10 of

the terms and conditions of supply of Electricity and clause 17 of the Tamil Nadu Electricity Supply Code for effecting electrical supply to the

property purchased by her.

The 5th respondent has filed counter affidavit and has stated as follows:

5.1. The attachment of 1.08 Acres in S.F. No. 126/2A1 & 127/3 have been done after verifying the photocopies of the following documents in

respect of M/s. Venkatram Textiles Pvt. Ltd.

(a) Registered Sale Deed No. 2673/1989 of Sub-Registrar Office, Palladam.

(b) Registered Sale Deed No. 2674/1989 of Sub-Registrar Office, Palladam.

(c) Gift Deed No. 1596/1992 of Sub-Registrar Office, Palladam

(d) Registered Sale deed No. 1779/2005 of Sub-Registrar Office, Palladam.

(e) Registered General Power of Attorney Deed No. 75/2005 of Sub-Registrar Office, Palladam.

5.2. The details of property transactions of M/s. Venkatram Textiles Pvt. Ltd., are furnished as under:

5.3. The Office of the 5th respondent has scrutinised Document Nos. 2674/1989 and 2673/1989. The total area of the land purchased by M/s.

Venkatram Textiles Pvt. Ltd. is 5.37 Acres. After purchase, in the year 1992, M/s. Venkatram Textiles Pvt. Ltd., gifted 0.106 Acres to PVKRN

Higher Secondary School vide Gift Deed No. 1596 of 1992. Similarly, an extent of 1.41 Acres in Survey No. 127/3 and 2.78 Acres in Survey

No. 126/2A1 has been sold to one Ms. Lakshmi Ramachandran vide Sale Deed No. 1799/2005. The total area of land sold to Ms. Lakshmi

Ramachandran and gifted to PVKRN Higher Secondary School is 4.296 Acres. The balance land available with M/s. Venkatram Textiles Pvt.

Ltd. is 1.074 Acres. Out of the land attached, 0.045 acres have been acquired by National Highways Authority of India and the balance land has

been sold to one Suguna and one Praveen as detailed hereunder.

5.4. The extent of attachment was 1.08 acres and the sale was done for 1.03 acres, after exact measurement and also after reducing the extent of

0.045 acres acquired by NHAI.

The petitioner has filed a reply affidavit to the following effect:

6.1. With respect to paragraphs 3 to 7 of the affidavit filed by the 3rd respondent, the total extent of the land comprised in S. No. 127/3 to which

the alleged service connection No. 37 has been provided by the respondent is stated incorrectly as 73.53 cents and is hence, denied. Further, the

total extent of land comprised in S. No. 127/3 is to an extent of 2.68 acres and not 73.53 cents as submitted by the 3rd respondent.

6.2. The respondents had effected Service Connection No. 37 in the name of M/s. Venkataraman Textiles for Survey No. 127/3, the total extent

of the same being 2.68 acres. The petitioner purchased 23.32% of the total extent of lands in Survey No. 127/3. As per the said calculation, the

total amount payable by the petitioner could be computed as Rs. 11,32,630/-. The respondents, by their letter dated 14.06.2012, in response to

the petitioner''s application had stated that the total amount due from M/s. Venkataraman Textiles Pvt. Ltd. is approximately Rs. 32,92,504/- and

therefore, the respondents have to prove and explain the split up the entire dues payable by M/s. Venkataraman Textiles Pvt. Ltd. The contention

of the respondents that the petitioner has to prove the factum that the Service Connection No. 37 was effected for the entire extent of 6 acres is

wholly unjustifiable and lacks legal sanctity.

The 5th respondent has filed reply affidavit stating that the petitioner has purchased 74 cents out of the total extent of 5.88 acres for which the

service connection has been effected by respondents 1 to 4/TANGEDCO and therefore, the petitioner has purchased 12.58% of the total extent

of land and is therefore liable to pay Rs. 6,19,499/- only.

Mr. I. Abrar Mohammed Abdulla, learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is liable to pay the dues only in proportion

to the extent of the property purchased by her as per the Notification dated 18.03.2011 and she is ready and willing to pay her share of the sub-

divided portion, which comes to the tune of Rs. 4,02,267/- in proportion to the total amount of Rs. 32,92,504/- to get electricity service

connection for the property purchased by her.

Conversely, Mr. S.K. Rameshwar, learned counsel appearing for respondents 1 to 4/TANGEDCO, would submit that as per clause 6.10 of

the terms and conditions of supply of electricity and as per clause 17 of the Tamil Nadu Electricity Supply Code, reconnection of

disconnected/dismantled service connections or new service connections to the premises in default of payment of dues shall be made only after

payment of such dues attributed to such premises by the applicant and therefore, the petitioner is lawfully liable to pay proportionate 85% of the

total dues attributable to the property, for effecting electricity supply to the property. It is his contention that the petitioner has got statutory

alternative remedy to get her grievance redressed by approaching the Circle level Consumer Grievance Redressal Forum and without exhausting

the said statutory remedy, the petitioner has approached this Court.

I have given thoughtful consideration to the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side and perused the records.

In order to decide the issue involved in this Writ Petition, it is necessary to refer to the Clause 17(9) (a) of the Tamil Nadu Electricity Supply

Code, 2004, which reads as under:

In case of service connections in a premises, which have been disconnected/dismantled for defaults in payment of dues whatsoever and if such

service connections are to be reconnected or new service connections are to be obtained by other persons in such premises either by purchase or

transfer or lease basis, the Distribution Licensee shall reconnect such service connections or effect new service connections, as the case may be, in

such premises only after payment of dues attributed to such premises by the applicant:

Provided that in case such premises have legally been sub-divided, the outstanding dues attributed to such premises shall be divided in proportion

to the area covered by that sub-division. A new service connection to any of such sub-divided premises shall be given only after the share of

outstanding dues attributed to such sub-divided premises, is duly paid by the applicant. The Distribution Licensee shall not refuse connection to an

applicant of such sub-divided premises only on the ground that, dues attributed to the other portion(s) of such sub-divided premises have not been

paid, nor shall the licensee demand record of last paid bills of such other portion(s) from such applicants.

The above proviso would make it clear that the proportionate amount for the sub-divided portion to which the service connection has been

sought has to be ascertained on verification of records and thereafter the demand has to be made and that service connection cannot be refused on

the ground that the dues attributed to the other portion(s) of such sub-divided premises have not been paid.

A perusal of the records would reveal that the total area of the land purchased by M/s. Venkatram Textiles Pvt. Ltd., who is the erstwhile

owner of the property, is 5.37 Acres. After purchase, in the year 1992, M/s. Venkatram Textiles Pvt. Ltd., gifted 0.106 Acres to PVKRN Higher

Secondary School vide Gift Deed No. 1596 of 1992. Similarly, an extent of 1.41 Acres in Survey No. 127/3 and 2.78 Acres in Survey No.

126/2A1 has been sold to one Lakshmi Ramachandran vide Sale Deed No. 1799/2005. The total area of land sold to Lakshmi Ramachandran

and gifted to PVKRN Higher Secondary School is 4.296 Acres. The balance land available with M/s. Venkatram Textiles Pvt. Ltd. is 1.074

Acres. Out of the land attached, 0.045 acres have been acquired by National Highways Authority of India and the balance land has been sold to

one Suguna and one Praveen in the proportions of 0.74 and 0.29 acres respectively, in which the petitioner claims that she has purchased 0.74

acres. The said aspect has not been verified by the Board and ultimately it arrived at the arrears of Rs. 49,24,478/- for the total area of 1.08 acres

and fixed the liability of the petitioner at a sum of Rs. 33,74,252/-.

The above provisions of the Code would empower the Distribution Licensee to demand the outstanding dues attributed to such premises,

which shall be divided in proportion to the area covered by that sub-division. In the instant case, the claim of the petitioner is that her property is

only to an extent of 0.74 acres and, therefore, she is liable to be pay only Rs. 4,02,267/- towards her share.

The above are all the factors to be reckoned, taking into account the revenue records of the total extent of land in question to which electricity

connection was given and now on a sub-division on sale how much extent of land has been in the hands of the petitioner. Accordingly, the claim for

electricity connection to such premises of the petitioner has to be ascertained on proper computation of the total extent of land and the

apportionment made for that purpose.

While analysing the above position, it could be seen that the claim for electricity connection cannot be refused on the ground that there are

arrears or dues attributable to the other portions of the property and the claim of the petitioner for electricity connection has to be considered by

the fourth respondent by demanding the appropriate apportioned amount for the premises of the petitioner. In case of any difficulty in arriving at the

actual extent of land owned by the petitioner and also the actual liability of the petitioner for effecting electricity supply to her premises, the fourth

respondent may consult the Superintending Engineer concerned, who is the third respondent herein, and verify the records of the Recovery Officer,

Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner of the Employees Provident Fund Organisation, who is the fifth respondent herein, so also the revenue

authorities concerned and arrive at the exact liability/apportionment of the petitioner based on the legal principles provided in the Code and

thereafter demand the same from the petitioner for effecting electricity supply.

This Court is unable to decide the apportionment, as the revenue authority is not a party to the writ proceedings. The fourth respondent is also

not in a position to verify the liability before giving a statement to this Court. Therefore, I am of the considered opinion that the claim of the

petitioner shall be considered only on verification of the revenue records and on consultation with the Recovery Officer, Assistant Provident Fund

Commissioner of the Employees Provident Fund Organisation, the fifth respondent herein, from whom the petitioner has purchased the property,

and after ascertaining the exact apportionment of the liability in respect of the premises in question to which the service connection has been sought

for in accordance with the above provisions, the fourth respondent is directed to demand the amount attributable to the premises of the petitioner in

question and on payment of the said amount by the petitioner, he shall provide service connection to the premises of the petitioner. Writ Petition is

disposed of accordingly. No costs. Consequently, the connected M.P. No. 1 of 2013 is closed.