Writ petition challenging an assessment under Section 126 of the Electricity Act against use of a domestic electricity connection for a computer workshop. The court held the applicable tariff for assessment was the commercial tariff and dismissed the petition, affirming the appellate authority's order.
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 GOPINATH P.
FRIDAY, THE 1ST DAY OF MARCH 2024 / 11TH PHALGUNA, 1945
WP(C) NO. 4152 OF 2014
PETITIONER/S:
B.VASANTHA KUMARI
AGED 60 YEARS
W/O.SHRI. M.RAVEENDRAN, RESIDING AT TC 1/2085, VASANTHA
VIHAR, MEDICAL COLLEGE P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695
011.
BY ADVS.
SRI.R.V.SUJIT KUMAR (EXPIRED)
SRI.E.S.ASHRAF
RESPONDENT/S:
1 KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR, VYDHUTI BHAVANAM, TRIVANDRUM - 695 004.2 THE SECRETARY KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD LIMITED, VYDHUTI BHAVANAM, PATTOM P.O., TRIVANDRUM - 695 004.3 THE APPELLATE AUTHORITY/DEPUTY CHIEF ENGINEER (RURAL) KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, KATTAKADA, TRIVANDRUM - 695 572.4 THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER ELECTRICAL SUB DIVISION, KESAVADASAPURAM, TRIVANDRUM.5 THE ASSESSING OFFICER /ASSISTANT ENGINEER KSEB LTD, ULLOOR SECTION, MEDICAL COLLEGE P.O., TRIVANDRUM - 695 004.BY ADVS.
SRI.JAICE JACOB,SC,KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD
SRI.JAICE JACOBSC,KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD
SRI.ARUNKUMAR A., SC, KSEB
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
01.03.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C) NO. 4152 OF 2014 2
JUDGMENT
Petitioner has approached this Court, challenging the assessment made against the petitioner under Section 126 of the Electricity Act, 2003 and the confirmation of the same by the Appellate Authority, namely, the 3rd respondent.
& Another V. West Bengal State Electricity Distribution
Company Limited and Others [AIR 2010 Cal. 84] , to contend that even if the proceedings under Section 126 of the Electricity Act are justified in this case, the applicable tariff for the purposes of assessment under Section 126 of the Electricity Act should have been the domestic tariff and not the commercial tariff. It is submitted that the appeal filed
WP(C) NO. 4152 OF 2014 3
before the 3rd respondent did not consider the contentions taken by the petitioner in a proper manner.
respondents would submit that the contention of the petitioner cannot be accepted in law. It is submitted that the proceedings under Section 126 of the Electricity Act were initiated as it was found that the electric connection obtained for domestic purpose was being used for a commercial purpose. It is submitted that, in such circumstances, the petitioner was liable to be penalised under Section 126 of the Electricity Act. It is submitted that the contention raised by the petitioner were properly considered by the 1st Appellate Authority. It is pointed out that the contention raised that the penalisation should have been at the domestic tariff was also considered by the appellate authority.
WP(C) NO. 4152 OF 2014 4
penalisation can only be at the rate applicable for domestic tariff by finding as follows:-
‘’The dictionary meanings of the word ‘’relevant " include ‘applicable’ ‘appropriate’ etc. At the time of inspection of the premises on 27.07.2013, the applicable tariff to the premises was that for commercial activity which was not disputed by the Appellant also. The domestic tariff allowed at the time of giving service connection to the premises was on the basis of certain criteria like presence of a kitchen in the building etc provided no other activities other than domestic is taking place in the premises. One of intentions of Section 126 itself is to prevent misuse of the subsidized tariff permitted at the time of giving service connection or latter so, as stated in the 1st para under Section 126, the appellant or other persons is benefited by the misuse of tariff which has been detected by the authorities later.
If assessment under 126 on misuse of tariff is done as argued by the appellant, the person is still benefited because domestic tariff is heavily subsidized to the extent that even at double the rate in domestic tariff, the penal charge payable would be still cheaper to that would have to be paid if billed in applicable commercial tariff. The subsidy given by Board has to be reimbursed by the Government from the tax payer's money. So agreeing to the Appellant's version would cause illegal diversion of subsidy from the targeted group to un-deserved sections.
It is seen that the Assessment Officer judiciously applied his mind calculate the assessment period by examining the consumption pattern of the consumer and the assessment period was limited to only four months without resorting to the arbitrary option to extend the period upto 12 as provided under Sub Section (5) of 126. The SRS Info Solution is not a SSI registered unit. Hence LT IV tariff cannot be considered for the use since it is clearly specified in tariff rule (Gazette No2652 dated 09.09.2013) that for according LT IV to units providing computer related commercial services, the units should have SSI registration. In view of the above facts, there is no ground for reducing the amount assessed by the Assessing Officer under Section 126 of the Act. ‘’
The contention of the petitioner that the tariff for the purpose of computation of penalty under Section 126 of the Electricity Act must be the domestic tariff does not stand to reason. The petitioner was found misusing the connection granted for domestic purposes for a commercial purpose. Therefore, it
WP(C) NO. 4152 OF 2014 5
does not appear from the provisions of Section 126 of the Electricity Act that penalization can be at the rate applicable for domestic tariff. The Assessing authority and Appellate Authority have considered the matter in a proper manner and no ground has made out for any interference under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The writ petition fails and it is accordingly dismissed.
Sd/-
GOPINATH P.
JUDGE
ajt
WP(C) NO. 4152 OF 2014 6
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 4152/2014
PETITIO |
NER EXHIBITS |
|||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
EXHIBIT |
P1. |
TRUE(AIR 2 |
COPY010 C |
OFALC |
DICTUMUTTA 84 |
IN SK. JAFAR ALI'S CASE). |
EXHIBIT |
P2. |
TRUE C |
OPY O |
F S |
ITE MAH |
AZAR DATED 27.07.2013. |
EXHIBIT |
P3. |
TRUE |
COPY |
OF |
OBJECTI |
ON DATED 07.08.2013. |
EXHIBIT |
P4. |
TRUE16.08. |
COPY2013. |
OF |
FINAL |
ASSESSMENT BILL DATED |
EXHIBIT |
P5. |
TRUE30.08. |
COP2013. |
Y |
OF RE |
VIEW APPLICATION DATED |
EXHIBIT |
P6. |
TRUE30.08. |
COPY2013. |
O |
F DECI |
SION ON EXT. P5 DATED |
EXHIBIT |
P7. |
TRUE30.08. |
COPY2013. |
T O |
F FINAL |
ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED |
EXHIBIT |
P8. |
TRUE |
COPY |
OF |
APPEAL |
NO.108/2013. |
EXHIBIT |
P9. |
TRUEITS RE |
COPYCEIPT |
OF. |
ENERGY |
BILL DATED 23.11.13 AND |
EXHIBIT |
P10. |
TRUEW.P(C) |
COPY29705 |
OF/13 |
JUDGM. |
ENT DATED 03.12.2013 IN |
EXHIBIT |
P11. |
TRUEBY 3RD |
COPYRESP |
OFOND |
ORDERENT. |
DATED 16.01.2014 PASSED |
EXHIBIT |
P12. |
TRUE |
COPY |
OF |
DEMAND |
NOTICE DATED 27.01.2014. |
EXHIBIT |
P13. |
TRUE |
COPY |
OF |
ENERGY |
BILL DATED 27.01.2014. |
2 issues framed by the court
Whether assessment under Section 126 of the Electricity Act for misuse of a domestic connection for commercial purpose should be computed at domestic tariff rather than commercial tariff.
Whether the Appellate Authority's order upholding the assessment required interference under Article 226.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
1 provisions across 1 enactments
B. Vasantha Kumari
Kerala State Electricity Board, represented by its Chairman and Managing Director
The Secretary, Kerala State Electricity Board Limited
The Appellate Authority/Deputy Chief Engineer (Rural), Kerala State Electricity Board, Kattakada
The Assistant Executive Engineer, Electrical Sub Division, Kesavadasapuram, Trivandrum
The Assessing Officer/Assistant Engineer, KSEB Ltd, Ulloor Section
Gopinath P.
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court