Advocate General P.H. Arvindh Pandian stated that only a rational approach, common to all, had been adopted. The court was also told that a lockdown to fight COVID-19 was never contemplated and as such there was no exact provision in the Tamil Nadu Electricity Supply Code of 2004 to apply to the present situation. Therefore, the method followed by Tangedco could not be termed as irrational or violative of any provision, it asserted.
NEWS
STATES
TAMIL NADU
TAMIL NADUBill calculation not arbitrary, Tangedco tells High Court
Legal CorrespondentCHENNAI 23 JUNE 2020 00:06 ISTUPDATED: 23 JUNE 2020 00:06 IST
Methodology will lead to collection of higher charges: litigant
The Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation (Tangedco) on Monday denied the charge of having followed an “arbitrary and unjust” method for calculating power charges to be paid by domestic consumers during the COVID-19 lockdown, when meter readings in individual households could not be recorded by its staff.
Justices R. Subbiah and Krishnan Ramasamy were told that “there were about 1.75 crore domestic consumers of electricity in the State. If every such consumer begins to calculate their bill for energy usage by applying permutations and combinations to suit their convenience, it will be impossible to arrive at any solution”.
The submission was made in reply to a public interest litigation petition filed by advocate M.L. Ravi of Desiya Makkal Katchi.
Advertising
Advertising
The litigant had claimed that the methodology adopted by Tangedco would lead to collection of higher charges from those who generally use less than 500 units of power, bi-monthly, compared to those who use more than that.
However, the counter filed through Additional Advocate General P.H. Arvindh Pandian stated that only a rational approach, common to all, had been adopted. The court was also told that a lockdown to fight COVID-19 was never contemplated and as such there was no exact provision in the Tamil Nadu Electricity Supply Code of 2004 to apply to the present situation.
Therefore, the method followed by Tangedco could not be termed as irrational or violative of any provision, it asserted.
Though the litigant had come up with a calculation to claim how the method had led to him reportedly paying higher charges and had also suggested an alternative method, the latter might end up counter productive to other consumers, the corporation added.
After taking the counter on file, the judges adjourned the case to next Monday for further hearing.
