S PANCHARATNAM Vs. TAMIL NADU ELECTRICITY REGULATORY COMMISSION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Challenging the appointment of the second respondent as member of the State Advisory Committee of the Tamil Nadu Electricity Board Regulatory Advising Commission, as notified in the notification dated 16.10.2002, for a period of one year from the date of notification, viz. 16.10.2002, representing the labour sector, the petitioner, who is admittedly one of the National Secretaries of the Electricity Employees Federation of India, seeks a writ of Declaration that the appointment of the second respondent to the State Advisory Committee by the first respondent's notification No.TNERC/SACR/2/2, dated 16th October 2002, published in Tamil Nadu Government Gazette without prior consultation with the representative labour groups and without considering the claims of eligible persons like him for appointment as member of the State Advisory Committee is void and of no legal effect.

(2.) 1.According to Mr.K. Chandru, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner, the appointment of the second respondent is contrary to Section 37 of the Electricity Regulatory Commissions Act (hereinafter referred to as the "Act") for want of transparency in the impugned appointment and is also in violation to Regulation 5 and 6 of the State Advisory Committee Regulations 2002 (hereinafter referred to as the "Regulation").

(3.) 1. Mr.K.S. Natarajan, learned counsel appearing for the first respondent Commission submits that there cannot be any dispute that the first respondent Commission is under a statutory obligation to ensure transparency in discharging their functions and to follow the provisions of the said regulation strictly. However, he gives an undertaking that the first respondent shall do so in future, as there is no necessity to traverse the allegations made against the second respondent at this point of time, in view of the restricted relief sought for on behalf of the petitioner by the learned senior counsel.