The High Court directed the appellate authority to dispose of the petitioner's statutory appeal on merits before immediately proceeding with recovery of disputed electricity arrears.
Recovery of amount under notice dated 20.12.2013 shall be deferred until final orders are passed on the appeal by the second respondent 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 MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN
MONDAY, THE 14TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2015/23RD AGRAHAYANA, 1937
WP(C).No. 405 of 2014 (A)
PETITIONER(S)/PETITIONERS:-:
SUBA MURUGAN R., AGED 35 YEARS W/O.MURUGAN, ALAKKAR VILLAGE, MANGALAM MURI CHENGANNUR VILLAGE, CHENGANNUR TALUK ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT.
BY ADV. SRI.AJITH MURALI
RESPONDENT(S)/RESPONDENTS:-:
1. THE SECRETARY, KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.
2. THE CHIEF ELECTRICAL INSPECTOR, KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.
3. THE ELECTRICAL INSPECTOR, ELECTRICAL DIVISION, KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD ALAPPUZHA, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT - 688 001. 4. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, ELECTRICAL DIVISION, KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD CHENGANNUR, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT - 689 121.
5. THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, ELECTRICAL SUB DIVISION KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, CHENGANNUR ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT - 689 121.
6. THE ASSISTANT ENGINEER, ELECTRICAL SUB DIVISION KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, CHENGANNUR ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT - 689 121. R1 & 4-R6 BY ADV. SRI.JAICE JACOB, SC,KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD R1-R2 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.LILLY K.T
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 14-12-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).No. 405 of 2014 (A)
APPENDIX
PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT P1. THE TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 23.04.2006. EXHIBIT P2. THE TRUE COPY OF THE DISCONNECTION NOTICE NO.BB/DC/1011/1/70 DATED 13.08.2010 ISSUED BY THE 5TH RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P3. THE TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER IN W.P.C. 26680/2010 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT DATED 06.09.2010. EXHIBIT P4. THE TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THIS HONOURABLE COURT IN W.P NO.26680/2010 DATED 10.06.2012. EXHIBIT P5. THE TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT DATED 09.08.2012. EXHIBIT P6. THE TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.SC-19864/2012/CEI DATED 14.12.2012 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P7. THE TRUE COPY OF THE DISCONNECTION NOTICE NO.BB/ARREAR NOTICE/12-13/CGNR/257/DATED 18.01.2013 ISSUED BY THE 6TH RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P8. THE TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THIS HON'BLE COURT HONOURABLE COURT IN W.P NO.3265/2013 DATED 04.02.2013. EXHIBIT P9. THE TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT DATED 19.02.2013. EXHIBIT P10. THE TRUE COPY OF THE DISCONNECTION NOTICE NO.BB/DC NOTICE/13-14/2/302 DATED 20.12.2013 ISSUED BY THE 6TH RESPONDENT.
RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT R1(a): COPY OF LETTER ISSUED BY the 2ND RESPONDENT TO 5TH RESPONDENT DATED 11.9.2013. EXHIBIT R1(b): COPY OF LETTER ISSUED BY THE 5TH RESPNDENT TO 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 30.9.13. EXHIBIT R1(c): COPY OF LETTER ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO 5TH RESPONDENT DATED 11.10.13.
/TRUE COPY/
PS TO JUDGE
ANU SIVARAMAN, J.
----------------------------------------------W.P(C).No. 405 of 2014
Dated this the 14th December, 2015
JUDGMENT
The above writ petition is filed challenging Exhibit P10 notice issued by the first respondent, Kerala State Electricity Board demanding an amount of Rs.81,170/- from the petitioner towards arrears of electricity charges due from the petitioner. The petitioner, who is the proprietor of a jewellery showroom, had been earlier issued with a bill for Rs.3,10,681/- which she had challenged before this Court stating that no details regarding the same were available and that she was not liable for any amount as raised by the respondents. An interim stay was granted on condition that petitioner pays an amount of Rs.1,55,340/- which was paid by the petitioner. The petitioner claims that Exhibit P1 statutory appeal had been preferred before the third respondent, but without considering the same, proceedings were initiated against her. By Exhibit P4 judgment, the
2
WP(C).405/14
respondents were directed to consider the appeal preferred by the petitioner. The petitioner was also directed to remit an amount of Rs.50,000/- without prejudice her contentions.
3
WP(C).405/14
by Exhibit P9 dated 19.2.2013. However, thereafter also Exhibit P10 notice has been issued by the Board claiming an amount of Rs.81,170/- from the petitioner without disposing of the appeal. This was challenged in this writ petition.
4
WP(C).405/14
WP(C).405/14 5
behalf of respondents 1, 4, 5 and 6 that the second respondent had, as a matter of fact, taken up the appeal preferred by the petitioner and had enquired with the KSEB whether the matter had been settled. The KSEB had also replied to the second respondent by Exhibit R1(b) letter stating that the matter had not been settled. In the above circumstances, nothing prevented the second respondent, in the light of the directions contained in Exhibit P8 judgment, from issuing a notice to the petitioner for hearing to be conducted by it on the appeal. This is more so, in view of the fact that the amount as directed in Exhibit P8 judgment had also been paid by the petitioner, receipt for which is produced as Exhibit P9.
In the above circumstances, I am of the opinion that it is imperative that the statutory appellate authority should be directed to consider the appeal preferred by the petitioner on merits. For enabling the consideration of Exhibit P1 appeal, the petitioner or its authorised representative and the authorised representative of the
WP(C).405/14 6
respondents are directed to appear before the second respondent on 6.1.2016 at 11 a.m. The second respondent shall, thereafter, consider the appeal, which is preferred by the petitioner and is available on record as Exhibit P1 and shall pass appropriate orders thereon after hearing the parties within a period of two months thereafter. The petitioner is permitted to produce additional documents, if any, with a copy to the respondents. The recovery of any amount pursuant to Exhibit P10 shall stand deferred until final orders are passed on the appeal by the second respondent and communicated to the petitioner.
The writ petition is ordered accordingly.
ANU SIVARAMAN
vgs15/12
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the statutory appellate authority should be directed to consider the petitioner's appeal on merits before enforcing the recovery of electricity arrears.
Whether the recovery proceedings should remain deferred pending the disposal of the statutory appeal by the appellate authority.
Suba Murugan R.
Secretary, Kerala State Electricity Board
Chief Electrical Inspector, Kerala State Electricity Board
Executive Engineer, Electrical Division, KSEB
Assistant Executive Engineer, KSEB
Assistant Engineer, KSEB
Anu Sivaraman
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
