The petitioner challenged an appellate order rejecting his appeal against a penalty for unauthorised additional load. The High Court rejected the writ petition, upholding the order as the appellate authority did not commit any error and the factual findings stood.
Writ petition dismissed; impugned appellate order dated 04.07.2009 dismissed.
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 27TH DAY OF JUNE 2016/6TH ASHADHA, 1938
WP(C).No. 4232 of 2010 (D)
PETITIONER :
WILFRED ZACHARIA, AGED 62 YEARS, SON OF PETER ZACHARIA, MANAGING PARTNER, ST.JOHN BOSCO COMPANY, HATCHERY DIVISION, THIRUMULLAVARAM, KOLLAM.
BY ADVS.SRI.H.B.SHENOY SRI.B.ASHOK SHENOY SRI.R.SIVADASAN SMT.LAKSHMI B.SHENOY
RESPONDENT(S):
1. KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,
VYDYUTHI BHAVAN, PATTOM P.O.,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 004.
2. THE DEPUTY CHIEF ENGINEER, (APPELLATE AUTHORITY), KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, ELECTRICAL CIRCLE, KOLLAM.
3. THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD,
KOLLAM DIVISION SQUAD, KOLLAM.
4. THE ASSISTANT ENGINEER, KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, ELECTRICAL SECTION, TANGASSERY, KOLLAM-19.
BY ADVS. SMT.P.K.RADHIKA-KSEB
SRI.P.P.THAJUDEEN, SC, K.S.E.B
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 27-06-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
sts
WP(C).NO.4232/2010
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:
RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS:
NIL
/TRUE COPY/
P.A.TO JUDGE
sts
A.M.SHAFFIQUE, J.
W.P.(C).No.4232 of 2010
----------------------------------- Dated this the 27th day of June, 2016
J U D G M E N T
The petitioner challenges Ext.P14 order passed by appellate authority exercising power under Section 127 of the Indian Electricity Act, 2003. By virtue of the above order dated 04.07.2009, appeal filed by the petitioner was dismissed approving the stand taken by the Board.
W.P.(C).No.4232 of 2010
2
W.P.(C).No.4232 of 2010
3
with the mahazar. In the said circumstances, when the factual findings are against the petitioner, there is no reason why this Court should interfere and quash Ext.P4. The appellate authority has also considered all the relevant issues and arrived at a finding.
In the result, I don't find any reason to interfere with the impugned order and hence, this writ petition is dismissed.
Sd/-
A.M.SHAFFIQUE, JUDGE.
AV
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the High Court should interfere with the appellate order dismissing the consumer appeal regarding unauthorised additional load and penalty.
Whether there is a statutory prescription requiring payment of energy charge or penalty for the additional connected load found unauthorised.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
WILFRED ZACHARIA
KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD
A.M.SHAFFIQUE
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
