Petitioner challenged revised electricity bills due to tariff change under writ petitions. Court held an interim order absolute and directed revision of impugned bills with payment provisions within two months.
Impugned bills to be revised by respondents; petitioner to pay revised amount within two months.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE B.P.RAY
THURSDAY, THE 23RD DAY OF FEBRUARY 2012/4TH PHALGUNA 1933
WP(C).No. 15651 of 2007 (L)
PETITIONER(S):
M.T.SURESH KUMAR, MANNIL HOUSE, MANDIRAM P.O., RANNY, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT, (ADVOCATE, M/S.MNS NAYAR CO., ST.BENEDICT ROAD, WEST END, KOMBARA, COCHIN-18).
BY ADVS.SRI.V.V.RAJA
SRI.R.RENJITH
RESPONDENT(S):
1. KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, REPRESENTED BY THE CHAIRMAN, K.S.E.B., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
2. THE ASST. ENGINEER, K.S.E.B., ELECTRICAL SECTION, ERNAKULAM CENTRAL.
R1 & R2 BY SRI.P.SANTHALINGAM (SR.) ADV.SRI.JOSE J.MATHEIKEL, SC, KSEB
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 23-02-2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
sts
WP(C)NO.15651/2007
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:
/TRUE COPY/
P.A.TO.JUDGE
sts
B.P.RAY, J.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C)No.15651 OF 2007
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 23rd day of February, 2012
JUDGMENT
Petitioner is a practicing lawyer at Ernakulam. Since he hails from Pathanamthitta, he is staying in first floor, 'Theertham', St. Benedict Road, West end, Cochin-18, which was taken on rent and is being used as an office cum residence. The consumer number given by the KSEB with respect to the first floor of the building is 5546001851. A notice was issued to the petitioner on 23-2-2007 informing the change of tariff from LT I(a) to LT VI(b) and therefore he has to remit an amount of Rs.1841/- towards electricity charges. Later Ext.P4 bill showing an amount of Rs.1699/- was issued. Both these bills were paid by the petitioner under protest. Peitioner has got a specific case that he is not liable to pay the amounts as required by the respondent Board. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that ever since the Electricity Act, 2003 came in to force, it is no longer open to the Board to unilaterally change the tariff. Still further, the petitioner was not at all heard before any decision is taken in this regard.
(i) declare that the decision taken by the respondent Board to change the category from LT I(a) to LT VI(b) in the instant case is bad in the eye of law.
(ii) call for the records leading to Ext.P4 and P5 and may quash the same by issuing a writ in the nature of certiorari.
(iii) issue a writ in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents not to demand electricity charges calculated based on tariff LT VI (b) from the petitioner.
W.P.(C)No.15651 OF 2007
:: 2 ::
(iv) issue a writ in the natrue of mandamus commanding the respondents to reimburse the excess amount collected from the petitioner.
interim order passed by this court be made absolute, since the petitioner is using the house in question for residential and for office purpose.
Writ petition is disposed of.
B.P.RAY, JUDGE
jes
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the interim order restricting collection of pending bills should be made absolute in case of a residential/office user.
Whether the impugned electricity bills for change of tariff category are to be revised by the respondents.
M.T.Suresh Kumar
Kerala State Electricity Board
The Asst. Engineer, K.S.E.B.
B.P.RAY
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
