AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
R.Subramanian, J
(1) It is not in dispute that the controversy in the Writ Petition is the subject matter of Writ Appeals in W.A.Nos.2539 & 2540 of 2018, which are said to be pending.
(2) In the interregnum, pursuant to the interim arrangement arrived at by the Hon-ble Division Bench in its order dated 19.11.2018, W.P(MD)No.9253 to 9255 of 2014 etc., batch has been disposed of on 05.02.2020 with the following directions:-
?5.In the interest of uniformity and consistency, the following directions are passed in the matter as well:~
(i) The petitioners are directed to pay 50% of the deemed demand charges, if not paid so far and continue to pay the same till the disposal of the writ appeal.
(ii) The petitioners are also liable to pay the balance deemed demand charges, if the writ appeal filed by the TANGEDCO is allowed.
(iii) Needless to say that the petitioners are also entitled to get similar refund, if any, if the first respondents in the writ appeals succeed, subject to the orders / observations of the Division Bench.
(iv) It is open to the petitioners to take recourse to any suitable action in the manner known to law, in the interregnum.?
(3) The learned counsel appearing for the parties had not disputed the above factual position. Hence, the Writ Petition is disposed of on the same lines. No costs. Consequently, connected writ miscellaneous petitions are closed.