P. PRADEEP CHANDRA Vs. THE ASSISTANT ENGINEER, (OPERATION & MAINTENANCE), TAMIL NADU GENERATION AND DISTRIBUTION CORPORATION LIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner further submits that he is the absolute owner of the agricultural Nanja and Punja lands, situated at No. 38, Kadappakkam Village, Ponneri Taluk, Tiruvallur District, comprised in S. No. 1, measuring an extent of 0.40.5 hectares i.e., 1.00 acre, Survey No. 2, measuring an extent of 0.76.5 hectares (i.e.) 1.89 acres and Survey No. 3, measuring an extent of 0.62.0 hectares (i.e.) 1.53 acres, totalling 4.42 acres of lands, having purchased the same for valid sale consideration from M/s. V. Kumar and others under a sale deed, dated 02.02.2009, registered as Document No. 409/2009 before the Sub -Registrar Office, Ponneri. Similarly, the petitioner is also the owner of agricultural punjai land situated at No. 39, Thathaimanji Village, Ponneri Taluk, Tikruvallur District, comprised in S. No. 13/1, measuring extent of 3.26.5 hectares (i.e.) 8.07 acres, having purchased the same for valid sale consideration from M/s. V. Kumar and others under a sale deed, dated 02.02.2009, registered as Document No. 410/2009 before the Sub -Registrar Office, Ponneri. The above properties are hereinafter referred to as petition mentioned property. All the revenue records in respect of the aforesaid lands are standing in the name of the petitioner and he is issued with pattas also by the authorities concerned.

(2.) THE petitioner further submits that his father is an agriculturist. Even though, the petitioner is an engineering graduate, he is assisting his father in agricultural activities and they are also engaged in agriculture. As the ground water has become saline the aforesaid lands were kept as barren lands as it had become unfit for agriculture. Most of the agriculturists have turned to fish culture due to acute salinity of the ground water in the locality and the aforesaid lands were surrounded by prawn ponds. Therefore, the petitioner has also laid prawn ponds in the petition property. The petitioner applied for electricity service connection to the respondent for his fish/prawn culture. Having inspected the lands/site and also satisfied with the documentary evidences, an electricity service connection, bearing No. 080 -002 -245 was effected by the respondent to his properties referred above during March 2014 and he is using the same for pumping water from the bore well and for aeration to the ponds for prawn culture. The petitioner has put prawn hatcheries/seeds in the ponds and invested a huge sum of Rs. 30 lakhs to Rs. 40 lakhs to the prawn culture by availing loan. The petitioner has been paying an amount ranging from Rs. 70,000/ - to Rs. 80,000/ - bi -monthly to the respondent since April 2014 for using the electricity.

(3.) THE petitioner further submits that he has been paying the electricity consumption charges according to the calculation of the respondent regularly without any default. The petitioner further submits that he has complied with all the formalities and also furnished all the necessary documents to the respondent along with application for service connection and the respondent also inspected the petitioner's property/prawn ponds and effected service connection. Therefore, only after being satisfied in all respects, the respondents effected the electricity service connection to his lands for fish/prawn culture and he has been using the same for prawn culture for the past 5 months. The petitioner further submits that prawn culture would not survive without electricity for even a minute, as the aeration is most essential for surviving and breathing of oxygen. The petitioner could not afford to spend Rs. 20,000/ - per day for electricity through generators and if electricity is not restored immediately, he will be left with no other option except abandon the prawn culture, which would cause financial havoc and he would be financially doomed and debt ridden. The petitioner further submits on perusal of the photocopy of the show cause notice handed over to him, he was informed that the respondent issued the service connection under Tariff -V as if it is for Brick klin chamber, temporary construction and other temporary purpose, which carries highest charge. Though the fish/prawn culture falls under the category of Tariff -III -A and for which alone the electricity service connection was effected to him by the respondent, but that charges are much lesser than Tariff -V. The petitioner has been paying electricity under Tariff -V to the respondent all along without knowing the same. Hence, the action of the respondent in allegedly serving the alleged show cause notice on some stranger in person and the consequent immediate disconnection of his electricity supply without notice is nothing but arbitrary and capricious exercise of authority. Hence, the petitioner entreats the Court to allow the above writ petition.