Disposed

K.Baby Thomas v. the K.S.E.B.

Kerala HC14 Feb 2008WP(C)/3369/2008

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court disposed of a writ petition concerning the petitioner's request for a fresh electricity connection. It suspended revenue recovery proceedings if the petitioner clears outstanding minimum guarantee arrears within three weeks and permits modified future payments under the agreement.

What did the court decide?

Revenue recovery proceedings suspended pending payment of arrears within three weeks; questions on minimum guarantee amounts to be reconsidered.

K.Baby Thomas Vs the K.S.E.B. — Service and Employment | Kerala HC (2008)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT :

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 14TH FEBRUARY 2008 / 25TH MAGHA 1929

¶5

WP(C).No. 3369 of 2008(A)

¶6

-------------------------------------

¶7

PETITIONER:

¶8

-------------------

¶9

BABY THOMAS, PROPRIETOR, M/S.E.E.S. INDUSTRIES, PUNNAKKAD (PO), KOZHENCHERY, RESIDING AT KANJIRAMNILKKUNNATHIL, THEKKEMALA (PO), PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT.

¶10

BY ADV. SRI.C.B.SREEKUMAR

¶11

RESPONDENTS:

¶12

-------------------------

¶13

1. THE KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY.

¶14

2. THE SENIOR SUPERINTENDENT, ELECTRICAL SECTION, KOZHENCHERY, PATHANAMTHITTA.

¶15

3. ASST. EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, ELECTRICAL SECTION, KOZHENCHERRY.

¶16

4. THE TAHSILDAR (REVENUE RECOVERY), PATHANAMTHITTA.

¶17

R1 TO R3 BY ADV. SRI.P.P.THAJUDEEN R4 BY SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.ANU SIVARAMAN

¶18

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14/02/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶19

Thottathil B. Radhakrishnan, J.

¶20

================================== W.P.(C)No.3369 of 2008

¶21

==================================

¶22

Dated this the 14^th day of February, 2008.

¶23

JUDGMENT

¶24

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner

¶25

and the learned standing counsel for the

¶26

respondents.

¶27

If the petitioner clears all arrears and

¶28

gets a fresh connection, the question of arrear on account of minimum guarantee agreement would have to be reconsidered because, the period for payment

¶29

of the minimum guarantee amounts is till 2001 and

¶30

if the petitioner remits the entire minimum guarantee amounts, which are outstanding as on the date of fresh connection, recovery of minimum guarantee amounts for the future period will have to stand modified by permitting the petitioner to

¶31

pay it in terms of the minimum guarantee agreement,

¶32

provided necessary renewals are also made by the

¶33

WPC3369/2008

¶34

-:2:-

¶35

petitioner regarding the minimum guarantee agreement. The parties are directed to abide by the aforesaid in relation to the request of the petitioner for fresh connection. Needless to say, all statutory formalities will have to be complied with. Exts.P5 and P6 revenue recovery proceedings will stand suspended until such a decision is taken, provided the petitioner pays off the entire existing arrear of minimum guarantee amounts within a period of three weeks.

¶36

Writ petition is disposed of in the above

¶37

terms.

¶38

Thottathil B.Radhakrishnan, Judge.

¶39

sl.

K.Baby Thomas v. the K.S.E.B.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K.Baby Thomas v. the K.S.E.B.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Devassia P.J Vs State of Kerala

V.M.Nizar Vs Kerala Co.Op.Tribunal

Ponnamma George Vs Recovery Officer, Debts Recovery Tribuna

Sulaiman Vs the K.S.E.B.

P.P.Rahim Haji Vs K.S.E.B

Thomas George Vs the Asst. Registrar, Co-Op. Societies