Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional Advocate General for the respondents and with their consent, the writ petition itself is taken up for final disposal.
2. Challenging the impugned orders passed by the respondents directing the petitioner to pay Parallel Operation Charges, which are not at all applicable to them, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition. However, it is seen that before coming to this Court, the petitioner has also given his reply dated 01.02.2017 against the said impugned orders seeking for the very same relief as prayed for in this writ petition.
3. At this juncture, it is stated by the learned Additional Advocate General for the respondents that since the said representation of the petitioner is pending for consideration, a short time may be given to consider the same on merits. Learned counsel for the petitioner has also agreed for the same.
4. Recording the joint request made by the learned counsel appearing on either side, this Court, without going into the merits of the matter, directs the respondents to consider the said representation dated 01.02.2017 of the petitioner on merits and in accordance with law, after affording an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. With this direction, the writ petition is disposed of. No Costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. 10.02.2017 rkm Index:yes/no T.RAJA, J.
rkm To
1.Tamil Nadu Electricity Generation and Distribution Corporation (TANGEDCO), Rep. By its Chairman and Managing Director, No.144, Anna Salai, Chennai 2.
2.The Superintending Engineer, Karur Electricity Distribution Circle, Karur.
3.The Chief Financial Controller/Revenue, TANGEDCO, No.800, Anna Salai, Chennai 2.
W.P.No.3359 of 2017 10.02.2017 http://www.judis.nic.in