L VIJAYALAKSHMI Vs. ASSISTANT ENGINEER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Since the petitioner is one of the Directors in M/s.Anbu Wattle Extracts Pvt. Ltd., having High Tension Electricity Service Connection No.34 under the respondent herein and also in arrears of payment of electricity consumption charges of the said service connection for a sum of Rs.1,12,058/-, the other service connection of the petitioner, viz., S.C.No.392 under the respondent is sought to be disconnected by the respondent in the impugned proceedings dated 19.12.2002. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner seeks a writ of Certiorari to call for the records of the respondent in Ka.No.U/Po/AE/E O & M/C.Na.Pa./Ka/the disconnection/No.549/2002 dated 19.12.2002 and to quash the same, on the ground that the respondent has no jurisdiction to pass the impugned order dated 19.12.2002.

(2.) Placing reliance on Clause 19.18 of the Terms and Conditions of the Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, Mr.N.Srinivasan, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent, contends that the respondent has got power to take appropriate action to disconnect the service connection of a consumer, if he is in default in payment of electricity charges with respect to some other service connection also. Clause 19.18 of the Terms and Conditions of the Tamil Nadu Electricity Board reads as follows:

(3.) In view of Clause 19.18 of the Terms and Conditions of the Tamil Nadu Electricity Board referred to above, I do not find illegality or irregularity in the impugned proceedings dated 19.12.2002. Hence, the writ petition fails and the same is dismissed. No costs. Consequently, WPMP.No.7950 of 2003 is also dismissed.