Disposed

Adv. R.V. Sujit Kumar v. the Kerala Water Authority

Kerala HC29 Jan 2021WP(C)/1846/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner challenged exorbitant water bills. Counsel argued for decision by the authority after hearing. Court directed petitioner to approach the Executive Engineer for a hearing while allowing payment at normal rates pending outcome.

What did the court decide?

Direction to approach Executive Engineer for orders after hearing within specified time. No disconnection. Remit bill at normal rate.

Adv. R.V. Sujit Kumar Vs the Kerala Water Authority — Consumer Protection | Kerala HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE P.V.ASHA

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 29TH DAY OF JANUARY 2021 / 9TH MAGHA, 1942

¶5

WP(C).No.1846 OF 2021(E)

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

ADV. R.V. SUJIT KUMAR

¶8

AGED 44 YEARS S/O.LATE M.REVEENDRAN, RESIDING AT C-44/950, SIVAPRIYA, POTTAKUZHY LANE, NORTH KALOOR, COCHIN - 17

¶9

BY ADVS.

¶10

SRI.S.SREEKUMAR (SR.) SRI.THOMAS P.KURUVILLA

¶11

RESPONDENTS:

¶12

1 THE KERALA WATER AUTHORITY

¶13

REP.BY THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, JALABHAVAN, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 011

¶14

2 THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER KERALA WATER AUTHORITY, RAVIPURAM, ERNAKULAM

¶15

3 THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER WATER WORKS SUB DIVISION, KALOOR COCHIN 682 017

¶16

R1-3 BY SHRI.P.BENJAMIN PAUL, SC, KERALA WATER AUTHORITY

¶17

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29.01.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶18

WP(C).No.1846 OF 2021(E)

¶19

¶20

JUDGMENT

¶21

Dated this the 29^th day of January 2021

¶22

The petitioner is aggrieved by the exorbitant

¶23

bill issued by the Kerala Water Authority in Ext.P5 and P6, demanding Rs.1,31,102/- and Rs.1,31,156/-

¶24

respectively. It is stated that Ext.P6 bill includes the normal bill also. According to the petitioner there was nobody in the house for the period from 15.07.2019 on wards and there is no

¶25

reason for such an exorbitant bills for those two

¶26

months when Exts.P1 to P3 bills were for Rs.69, 52

¶27

and 54 only. Aggrieved by the demand in Exts.P5 and P6 bills petitioner has submitted Ext.P8 representation before the the 3^rd respondent,

¶28

Assistant Executive Engineer.

¶29

Adv.Sri.Benchamin Paul, the learned

¶30

Standing counsel submits that the bills are issued

¶31

on the basis of actual reading. As a serious

¶32

dispute is seen raised by the petitioner in Ext.P8, it is only appropriate that a decision is taken on

¶33

WP(C).No.1846 OF 2021(E)

¶34

¶35

it by the 3^rd respondent. The learned Standing

¶36

Counsel submits that the petitioner has to approach the Executive Engineer.

¶37

Therefore the petitioner shall approach the

¶38

Executive Engineer with a representation within a period of two weeks along with a copy of the judgment. The Executive Engineer shall pass orders

¶39

on the same after affording an opportunity of

¶40

hearing to the petitioner within a further period of three weeks. Till such time no disconnection

¶41

shall be effected and the petitioner shall be

¶42

allowed to remit the bill at the normal rate.

¶43

The writ petition is accordingly disposed of.

¶44

P.V.ASHA JUDGE

¶45

¶46

WP(C).No.1846 OF 2021(E)

¶47

¶48

APPENDIX

¶49

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

¶50

EXHIBIT P1	TRUE COPY OF PAYMENT RECEIPT ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT TOWARDS BILL DATED 1.1.2019
EXHIBIT P2	TRUE COPY OF WATER BILL DATED 2.3.2020
EXHIBIT P3	TRUE COPY OF WATER BILL DATED 7.9.2020
EXHIBIT P4	TRUE COPY OF DEATH CERTIFICATE OF THE PETITIONER'S FATHER DATED 13.1.2021
EXHIBIT P5	TRUE COPY OF WATER BILL DATED 2.11.2020
EXHIBIT P6	TRUE COPY OF WATER BILL DATED 1.1.2021 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT P7	TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE OF DEMAND DATED 14.1.2021 FOR RS.1,31,102/-
EXHIBIT P8	TRUE COPY OF REPRESENTATION DATED 16.1.2021 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT

¶51

RESPONDENTS EXIBITS : NIL

¶52

//TRUE COPY//

¶53

PA TO JUDGE

Adv. R.V. Sujit Kumar v. the Kerala Water Authority

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Adv. R.V. Sujit Kumar v. the Kerala Water Authority

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ashraf T. Muhammed Vs Greater Cochin Development Authority

S.R.Venugoapal Prabhu Vs the Kerala Industrial Infrastructure Development Corporatin (Kinfra)

Ahamad A.K. Vs State of Kerala

M. Azeez Vs the District Magistrate, Malappuram

Beula Jasmin, Vs Kerala State Finance Enterprises Ltd. (Ksfe Ltd.)

Priya P. Vs National Disaster Management Executive Committee