Madras High Court Orders Power Restoration for Paper Mill, Allows Time for Safety Certificate

Get the full picture - access the original judgement of the court order here

Case Name

M/s. Sunphoenix Newsprint Pvt. Ltd. vs. The Superintending Engineer, TANGEDCO Distribution, Sivagangai (High Court of Madras)

W.P.(MD)No.3249 of 2025 and W.M.P.(MD)Nos.2260 to 2262 of 2025

Date: 04th February 2025

Key Takeaways

• The court prioritized business continuity and employee livelihoods by allowing immediate reconnection of electricity.
• The company must submit the CEIG Certificate (a safety compliance document) within three months.
• If the certificate is not provided in time, the electricity board can disconnect power without further notice.
• The judgment balances regulatory compliance with practical business needs.
• The court enforced its earlier order regarding payment of electricity dues in installments.

Issue

Should the electricity board (TANGEDCO) insist on the immediate production of a CEIG Certificate before restoring electricity, even after the company has started paying its outstanding dues as per a previous court order?

Facts

• Parties:
• Petitioner: M/s. Sunphoenix Newsprint Pvt. Ltd. (a paper mill)
• Respondent: The Superintending Engineer, TANGEDCO Distribution, Sivagangai
• Background:
• The company had outstanding electricity dues.
• In a previous case (W.P.(MD)No.30465 of 2024), the court allowed the company to pay the dues in three installments (Jan–Mar 2025) and ordered reconnection of electricity after the first payment.
• The company paid the first installment and requested reconnection.
• TANGEDCO then demanded a CEIG Certificate (a safety certificate from the Chief Electrical Inspector to Government) before restoring power.
• The company argued that obtaining this certificate would take six months, which would harm their business and employees.

Arguments

Petitioner (Paper Mill):

• They complied with the court’s earlier order by paying the first installment.
• They applied for the CEIG Certificate, but it takes about six months to get.
• Insisting on the certificate before reconnection is unfair and threatens their business and employees’ livelihoods.
• Requested reconnection now, with a promise to submit the certificate within three months.

Respondent (TANGEDCO):

• Demanded the CEIG Certificate as a precondition for reconnection, citing safety and regulatory compliance.

Key Legal Precedents

• Article 226 of the Constitution of India:
• The writ petition was filed under this article, which empowers High Courts to issue certain writs for the enforcement of rights.
• Previous Order in W.P.(MD)No.30465 of 2024:
• The court’s earlier order allowed payment of dues in installments and reconnection after the first payment.
• No other specific case laws or section/rule numbers are cited in the judgment text provided.

Judgement

• The court directed TANGEDCO to immediately restore the electricity connection, as the company had paid the first and second installments.
• The company must submit the CEIG Certificate within three months from the date of the order.
• If the certificate is not provided within this period, TANGEDCO can disconnect the electricity without further notice.
• The writ petition was disposed of with these directions, and all related miscellaneous petitions were closed. No order as to costs.

FAQs

Q1: What is a CEIG Certificate?

A: It’s a safety certificate issued by the Chief Electrical Inspector to Government, required for certain electrical installations.

Q2: Why did the court allow reconnection before the certificate was produced?

A: The court considered the business’s compliance with payment orders, the time needed to get the certificate, and the impact on employees and business operations.

Q3: What happens if the company doesn’t submit the certificate in three months?

A: TANGEDCO can disconnect the electricity supply without any further notice.

Q4: Does this mean companies can always delay safety certificates?

A: No. This decision was based on the specific facts of this case, including prior court orders and the company’s compliance with payment terms.

Q5: Was any penalty imposed on the company?

A: No penalty or costs were imposed; the focus was on compliance and business continuity.