Disposed

Prima Agro Products Ltd. v. K.S.E.Board

Kerala HC5 Jun 2014WP(C)/2133/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala disposed of a writ petition filed by Prima Agro Products Ltd., holding the deposited amount of Rs.1,55,00/- refundable based on a connected judgment, directing the respondent to refund or adjust the sum within three months.

What did the court decide?

Directed the Special Officer (Revenue) to take steps to refund or adjust the amount of Rs.1,55,000/- deposited by the petitioner within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment

Prima Agro Products Ltd. Vs K.S.E.Board — Service and Employment | Kerala HC (2014)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 5TH DAY OF JUNE 2014/15TH JYAISHTA, 1936

¶5

WP(C).No. 2133 of 2013 (N)

¶6

PETITIONER(S):

¶7

PRIMA AGRO PRODUCTS LTD. PLOT NO.71, INDUSTRIAL AREA, KOCHUVELI, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695021 REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR.

¶8

BY ADVS.SRI.J.JULIAN XAVIER SRI.FIROZ K.ROBIN

¶9

RESPONDENT(S):

¶10

1. KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, VYDHUTHI BHAVANAM PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-4.

¶11

2. THE DEPUTY CHIEF ENGINEER ELECTRICAL CIRCLE URBAN KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, POWER HOUSE BUILDING THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-36.

¶12

3. SPECIAL OFFICER (REVENUE) KSE BOARD, VYDHUTHI BHAVANAM, PATTOM THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-4.

¶13

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

¶14

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 05-06-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

WP(C).No. 2133 of 2013 (N)

¶16

APPENDIX

¶17

PETITIONER(S) EXHIBITS

¶18

EXHIBIT P1-	TRUE COPY OF THE SANCTION ORDER DATED 21-12-2012 FOR ENERGIZATION ISSUED BY THE DEPUTY ELECTRICAL INSPECTOR THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
EXHIBIT P1(A)-	TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT EXTRACT OF THE SCHEME APPROVAL DATED 28-9-2012 BY THE CHIEF ELECTRICAL INSPECTOR.
EXHIBIT P2-	TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION FOR ADDITIONAL LOAD FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P2(A)-	COPY OF THE RECEIPT DATED 4-1-2013 SHOWING THE REMITTANCE OF RS.1,000/- AS APPLICATION FEES.
EXHIBIT P3-	TRUE COPY OF PROCEEDINGS/LETTER DATED 18-1-2013 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P4-	TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER IN WPC NO. 12698/2005 DATED 5-4-2005.
EXHIBIT P5-	TRUE COPY OF THE G.O.(RT)NO.77/05/PD DATED 2-3-2005.
EXHIBIT P6-	TRUE COPY OF NOTICE DATED 4-8-2012 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P7-	TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED 11-10-2012 FILED BEFOERE THE 3RD RESPONDENT BY THE PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P8-	TRUE COPY OF THE REMINDER/LETTER DATED 18-12-2012 ALONG WITH CALCULATION CHART FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P9-	TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER/PROCEEDINGS DATED 14-1-2013 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER.

¶19

RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS : NIL

/TRUE COPY/

P. A. TO JUDGE

C.K. ABDUL REHIM, J.

¶24

W.P.(C). No. 2133 of 2013

¶25

--------------------------------------------------Dated this the 5^th day of June, 2014

¶26

JUDGMENT

¶27

Issue involved in this writ petition is closely connected with the judgment passed on today in WP(C) No.12698/2005. During pendency of WP(C) No.12698/2005, the petitioner had filed this writ petition seeking direction to allow the application submitted seeking sanction for additional power load. It is noticed that, through an interim order issued by this court on 22.01.2013, the 2^nd respondent was directed to consider the request for enhancement of connected load subject to condition of payment of a sum of 1,55,000/- towards the demand made under Ext.P3. It is submitted that additional power was already sanctioned on the basis of the interim order on depositing a sum of 1,55,000/stipulated.

¶28

It is further evidenced that arrears due to the

¶29

Board was also settled payment under the 'One Time Settlement Scheme', as observed in the judgment in

¶30

W.P.(C). No. 2133 of 2013

¶31

-2-

¶32

WP(C) No.12698/2005. Hence the counsel for the petitioner had pointed out that the amount of `1,55,000/deposited is liable to be refunded. It is not disputed that the said amount is liable to be refunded.

¶33

The writ petition is disposed of by directing the 3^rd respondent to take steps to refund/adjust the amount of `1,55,000/- deposited by the petitioner on the basis of the interim order, at the earliest, at any rate within a period of 3 months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

¶34

C.K. ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE

¶35

Prima Agro Products Ltd. v. K.S.E.Board

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Prima Agro Products Ltd. v. K.S.E.Board

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sibi Chandran.P.C Vs K.G.Mohanlal IFS

Vinodan A.K Vs Prasanna Kumari

Asokan S. Vs the Assistant Executive Engineer

M/S Popular Vehicles Vs Kerala State Electricity Board

Prima Agro Products Limited Vs State of Kerala

E.Mohammed Haji Vs K.S.E.Board & Others