The Court, despite the petitioner challenging demand notices, directed the second respondent to consider specific exhibits (P9 and P11) and take an appropriate decision thereon before disposing of the writ petition.
Direction to the second respondent to consider Exhibits P9 and P11 and take appropriate decision in the matter.
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 A.M.SHAFFIQUE
MONDAY, THE 6TH DAY OF JUNE 2016/16TH JYAISHTA, 1938
WP(C).No. 2781 of 2016 (W)
PETITIONER(S):
G.SURESH KUMAR, KOMALATH HOUSE, KODUMON P.O., PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT, PIN-691 555, (PROPRIETOR, MALAYALAM CABLE TV NETWORK).
BY ADV. SRI.N.SASIDHARAN UNNITHAN
RESPONDENT(S):
1. KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, VAIDHYUTHA BHAVANAM, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 024.
2. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, ELECTRICAL DIVISION, ADOOR, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT-691 550.
3. THE ASSISTANT ENGINEER, KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, ELECTRICAL SECTION, EZHAMKULAM, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT-691 523.
BY SRI.JAICE JACOB,SC
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 06-06-2016, ALONG WITH WPC.NO.19379/2016 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
PJ
WP(C).No. 2781 of 2016 (W)
APPENDIX
PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS
EXT.P1. TRUE COPY OF THE REGISTRATION CERTIFICATE DATED 11/2/2015 ISSUED BY THE POSTMASTER ADOOR.
EXT.P4. TRUE COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE DATED 11/5/2015 FOR RS.22,747/EXT.P5. TRUE COPY OF THE CASH RECEIPT DATED 10/8/2015 FOR RS.23,772/EXT.P6. TRUE COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE DATED 9/10/2015 FOR RS.19,952/EXT.P7. TRUE COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE DATED 19/12/20-06 FOR RS.23,554/EXT.P8. TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 20/3/2015 OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT EXT.P9. TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 29/12/2015 OF THE PETITIONER
EXT.P10. TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 5/1/206 OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT EXT.P11. TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 8/1/2006 OF THE PETITIONER
RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS
NIL.
/ TRUE COPY /
P.S. TO JUDGE
PJ
A.M. SHAFFIQUE, J.
------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No. 2781 of 2016
Dated this the 6th day of June, 2016
JUDGMENT
Though the petitioner challenges Exts.P8 and P10 demand notices, at the time of hearing the only request is for a direction to the Executive Engineer to consider Exts.P9 and P11 and take appropriate decision in the matter.
Having regard to the limited request made in this writ petition, there will be a direction to the second respondent to consider Exts.P9 and P11 and take appropriate decision in the matter.
The writ petition is disposed of as above.
Sd/-
A.M. SHAFFIQUE JUDGE
Scl/6.06.2016
True Copy
PA to Judge
2 issues framed by the court
Whether petitioner is entitled to direction to respondent to consider specific petition exhibits and take appropriate decision.
How to dispose of writ petition where request during hearing differs from original challenge.
G.SURESH KUMAR
KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD
THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD
THE ASSISTANT ENGINEER, KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD
A.M. SHAFFIQUE
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
