R NATRAJAN Vs. ASSITANT ENGINEER TAMILNADU ELECTRICITY BOARD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. V. Ilangovan learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. G. Vasudevan learned counsel appearing for the respondent/Tamil Nadu Electricity Board. The demand notice issued by the respondent herein in K. No. Vu. Po. Na. Vaa. /Mi. E. A. 423/361 dated 11.2.2008 has been challenged by the petitioner, seeking to quash the same.

(2.) The learned counsel for the petitioner, while making his submissions on the basis of the pleadings stated that the petitioner is running a small industry manufacturing of P. V. C. pipes. Petitioner has obtained electricity service connection (Industrial) in S. C. No. 423 for 6 H. P. Motor. Thereafter, additional load for 17 H. P. Motor was obtained in the year 2006. Since the load was heavy a new meter was fixed on 8.11.2006 and reading was taken periodically from December 2006 onwards and there was no arrears of payment of electricity bills.

(3.) While so, on 11.21.2008, the respondent issued a notice stating that a wrong reading was taken since at the time of installation of the meter, the reading was 172439 and when it was inspected on 9.1.2008 the reading was 224074 which shows that the wrong reading was taken and hence, the petitioner is liable to pay a sum of Rs. 1,22,391/- for the period from December 2006 to December 2007. Challenging the said demand notice, petitioner is before this Court in this writ petition on the ground that the demand notice is issued without affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and without hearing the objection/explanation of the petitioner. Thus, according to the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, the impugned notice is in gross violation of the principles of natural justice.