Dismissed

V.M.Noufal v. Assistant Engineer, Electrical Section, Kseb

Kerala HC3 Jan 2013WP(C)/251/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court acknowledged that the appeal lies to the Deputy Chief Engineer under Section 127 of the Electricity Act, 2003. The writ petition was dismissed with the direction to enable the petitioner to exhaust the statutory appellate remedy while temporarily preserving the electricity connection for two weeks. It is a one-line order.

What did the court decide?

The electricity connection to the petitioner shall not be snapped for a period of two weeks from today.

V.M.Noufal Vs Assistant Engineer, Electrical Section, Kseb — Consumer Protection | Kerala HC (2013)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.CHITAMBARESH

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 3RD DAY OF JANUARY 2013/13TH POUSHA 1934

¶5

WP(C).No. 251 of 2013 (F)

¶6

PETITIONER(S):

¶7

V.M.NOUFAL, GOLDEN FURNITURE INDUSTRIES DEPARTMENT PLOT, ATHIRAMPUZHA.

¶8

BY ADV. SRI.V.N.SUNIL KUMAR

¶9

RESPONDENT(S):

¶10

ASSISTANT ENGINEER, ELECTRICAL SECTION, KSEB, ATHIRAMPUZHA 686 562.

¶11

ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER ELECTRICAL SUB DIVISION, KSEB, ETTUMANOOR 686 631.

¶12

BY SRI.JAICE JACOB,SC,KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD

¶13

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03-01-2013, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶14

WP(C) NO.251/2013

¶15

APPENDIX

¶16

PETITIONER(S) EXHIBITS

¶17

EXHIBIT P1	: COPY OF SITE MAHAZAR DATED 05.12.2012
EXHIBIT P2	: COPY OF PROVISIONAL ASSESSMENT ORDER
EXHIBIT P3	: COPY OF PROVISIONAL BILL DATED 07.12.2012.
EXHIBIT P4	: COPY OF OBJECTION DATED 12.12.2012 FILED BY THE PETITIONER AGAISNT THE PROVISIONAL ASSESSMENT ORDER.
EXHIBIT P5	: COPY OF FINAL ASSESSMENT ORDER
EXHIBIT P6	: COPY OF FINAL BILL DATED 21.12.2012
EXHIBIT P7	: ORDER DATED 11.12.2012 REGARDING VOLUNTARY DISCLOSURE SCHEME.
EXHIBIT P8	: COPY OF REQUEST SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER FOR VOLUNTARY DISCLOSURE DATED 27.12.2012.
EXHIBIT P9	: COPY OF REQUEST SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER SEEKING TIME DATED 27.12.2012.

¶18

RESPONDENT(S) EXHIBITS: NIL

¶19

/TRUE COPY/

¶20

P.A. TO JUDGE.

¶21

V. CHITAMBARESH, J

¶22

WP(C) NO. 251 OF 2013

¶23

Dated this the 3^rd day of January, 2013

¶24

JUDGMENT

¶25

Ext.P3 is the provisional bill issued to the petitioner for detection of alleged unauthorised load. Ext.P4 is the explanation submitted by the petitioner to the provisional bill. Ext.P5 order followed directing the petitioner to pay a sum of ` 1,09,967/(Rupees One lakh nine thousand nine hundred and sixty seven only) on this count. Ext.P5 order as well as Ext.P6 final bill issued pursuant thereto are open to challenge in an appeal. An appeal lies to the Deputy Chief Engineer under Section 127 of the Electricity Act, 2003.

¶26

I therefore relegate the petitioner to the appellate remedy wherein all the questions could be agitated. It is open to the petitioner to claim the benefit of the voluntary disclosure scheme as well in the appeal. The appellate authority can consider whether the benefit of the scheme could be extended to the petitioner or not. The electricity connection to the petitioner shall not be snapped for a period of two weeks from today. This

¶27

¶28

WP(C) No. 251/2013

¶29

is for the purpose of enabling the petitioner to work out his statutory remedy as above.

¶30

The Writ Petition is disposed of.

¶31

V. CHITAMBARESH JUDGE

¶32

ncd

V.M.Noufal v. Assistant Engineer, Electrical Section, Kseb

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

V.M.Noufal v. Assistant Engineer, Electrical Section, Kseb

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Viswanathan Nair Vs Andrews Jacob

Binu Vs the Secretary, R.T.A.

Santhosh Kumar T.S. Vs the Assistant Labour Officer

Jahana Vs Assistant Engineer, Electrical Section, Kseb, Athirampuzha

Unnikrishnan Vs Assistant Engineer

Shajahan Vs the Registering Authority