HC dismisses plea over high power bills in State

Observing that the Tangedco has acted in all fairness in ensuring that the consumers are not deprived of the subsidy of 100 units per bi-monthly cycle, a division bench comprising Justice MM Sundresh and Justice R Hemalatha came down on petitioner ML Ravi for contending that Tangedco had enriched itself through such billing.

Pointing out that there is no valid reason from any perspective to find the impugned order as arbitrary, the bench felt that “instead it is sound in reasoning and has benefited the consumers”. It further observed: “The method of calculation has to be uniform and acceptable to all and also in tune with the Electricity Supply Code. It cannot be according to one’s own ‘whims and fancies’.”

“COVID-19 pandemic is unprecedented and has caused total disruption of normal life. While the welfare of the public is important, the role of the government in tackling the crisis and the resources required for the same is not a trivial issue to be brushed aside. The need to pay taxes and other statutory obligations on time becomes paramount to keep the government active and helpful,” the bench said.

Also, holding that the comparison between Low Tension Domestic Consumers and Low-Tension Industrial Consumers is irrelevant, the bench said: “Allowing self-assessment for the Low-Tension Domestic Consumers as suggested by the petitioner would have resulted in chaos. Even assuming that it is allowed, we do not comprehend as to how it would have helped the petitioner.”

The petitioner had contended that Tangedco’s calculation mode has resulted in low tension domestic consumers having to pay 12 to 50% higher charges than permissible under the TN Electricity Supply Code.