In a writ petition challenging an additional electricity bill, the Kerala High Court held that no opportunity of hearing was afforded to the petitioner and material was not placed before the assessing authority.
Matter remanded to assessing authority with supply of CAG report and opportunity of hearing.
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
FRIDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF MARCH 2012/19TH PHALGUNA 1933
WP(C).No. 5042 of 2007 (A)
PETITIONER(S):
SUREERA ALLOYS (P) LTD., NATTUKAL, NALLEPPILLY, PALAKKAD DISTRICT REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR SRI.R.ELANGOVAN.
BY ADV. SRI.P.V.THOMAS
RESPONDENT(S):
1. THE KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, VYDYUTHI BHAVAN PATTOM PALACE P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
2. THE SPECIAL OFFICER (REVENUE), K.S.E.B. VYDYUTHI BHAVAN, PATTOM PALACE P.O. THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
3. THE DEPUTY CHIEF ENGINEER, ELECTRICAL CIRCLE, KSEB, PALAKKAD.
BY ADV. SRI.P.SANTHALINGAM, SC
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 09-03-2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
tss
W.P.(C) NO.5042/2007
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:-
P1:- COPY OF THE INVOICE NO.28/2873 DTD. 5.1.2004 ISSUED BY THE IST RESPONDENT.
P1(A):- COPY OF THE PAYMENT ADVICE ISSUED BY THE IST RESPONDENT ON 5.1.2004. P2:- COPY OF THE OBJECTION DTD. 12.1.2004 FILED BY THE PETITIONER, BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
P3:- COPY OF THE OBJECTION FILED BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT BY THE PETITIONER COMPANY, DTD. 12.1.2004.
P4:- COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DTD. 16.2.2004 IN WPC. 1495/2004.
P5:- COPY OF THE ORDER NO.HTB 28/2876/06-07/333 DTD. 30.1.2007.
P6:- COPY OF THE HT AGREMENT NO.77/95-96 DTD. 24.8.1995.
P7:- COPY OF THE EXPERT OPINION DTD. NIL
//TRUE COPY//
P.A. TO JUDGE
tss
B.P. RAY, J.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C) No. 5042 of 2007
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Dated this the 9th day of March, 2012.
JUDGMENT
The petitioner is a HT Industrial category consumer engaged in the manufacture of MS Ingots. This writ petition has been filed challenging Exts.P1 bill, P1-A payment invoice and P5 order passed by the appellate authority. Ext.P1 bill was issued demanding an additional amount of `21,72,197/-. The aforesaid additional bill was issued on the basis of audit report of CAG, which was not given to the petitioner.
W.P.(C) No. 5042/2007 : 2:
authority. The petitioner may file a written objection through counter affidavit based on the materials now received as well as CAG report which will be supplied to the petitioner. The entire exercise shall be completed within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.
is open to the petitioner to produce the same before the assessing authority and the authority shall take into consideration the aforesaid Exhibit as well as the report furnished by the officials of the Board and pass a reasoned order after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.
This writ petition is disposed of as above.
sd/- B.P. RAY, JUDGE.
rv
W.P.(C) No. 5042/2007
: 3:
B.P. RAY, J.
O.P.No. 13887 of 2002
Dated this the 17th day of February, 2012.
W.P.(C) No. 5042/2007
: 4:
JUDGMENT
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the consumer was afforded a fair opportunity of hearing regarding the additional bill based on CAG audit report?
SUREERA ALLOYS (P) LTD.
THE KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD
THE SPECIAL OFFICER (REVENUE), K.S.E.B.
THE DEPUTY CHIEF ENGINEER, ELECTRICAL CIRCLE, KSEB
B.P. RAY
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
