HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.39098 of 2014 Date:19.12.2014 Between:
M/s Ganapathi Minerals, Hanmakonda, reptd by its Proprietor-A.Indra Reddy . Petitioner And:
The State of Telangana, reptd by its Principal Secretary, Department of Energy and three others.
. Respondents Counsel for the Petitioner: Sri V.L.Surendra Counsel for the Respondents: Sri P.Vinod Kumar The Court made the following:
ORDER:
This Writ Petition is filed for a Mandamus to declare the action of the respondents, in not granting a reasonable number of instalments to the petitioner for payment of Rs.6,47,158/-, as illegal and arbitrary.
The petitioner is a HT consumer of the respondents. For non- payment of the electricity charges, the supply was disconnected to the petitioner’s Service Connection. On 07.04.2014, the petitioner requested the respondents to dismantle the Service Connection. However, the respondents have demanded a sum of Rs.6,47,158/- towards the arrears of C.C.charges/minimum charges. The petitioner made a representation, dated 28.11.2014, to the respondents for allowing it to pay the arrears in 12 instalments. By proceedings, vide Memo No.CMD/DIR(Fin)/CGN(Fin)/GM(Fin)/SAO (Rev) AO-
Rev/D.No.368, dated 09.12.2014, the Chief General Manager (Fin) of the Telangana Northern Power Distribution Company Limited, Warangal (for short ‘TNPDCL’) has permitted the petitioner to pay the entire arrears in two instalments, with the first instalment commencing immediately and the second instalment in a month thereafter. Feeling aggrieved thereby, the petitioner filed this Writ Petition.
Ordinarily, grant of instalments falls within the realm of the discretion of the licensee and this Court seldom interferes with such discretion. However, if the discretion exercised by the licensee is not sound and proper, in such cases, this Court will interfere in order to provide reasonable relief to the citizens.
The case on hand is one such case, where the Chief General Manager, TNPDCL has not exercised sound discretion. When the petitioner is saddled with payment of interest/surcharge for delayed payment, I do not find any reason why it was not allowed to clear the arrears by granting reasonable number of instalments. Therefore, the petitioner is permitted to pay the arrears in six equal monthly instalments, with the first instalment commencing within one week from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and the remaining five instalments shall be paid with intervals of one month each. The petitioner is also liable to pay the interest/surcharge at the rate of 18% per annum on the arrears.
The Writ Petition, accordingly, stands disposed of.
As a sequel to disposal of the Writ Petition, W.P.M.P.No.49011 of 2014 filed by the petitioner for interim relief is disposed of as infructuous.
JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY 19th December 2014 DR