← Library
High Court of KeralaWP(C)/10433/2015disposed of

T M Saleem v. The Assistant Engineer

2015-03-31Honourable Mr.Justice V.Chitambaresh4 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.CHITAMBARESH TUESDAY, THE 31ST DAY OF MARCH 2015/10TH CHAITHRA, 1937 WP(C).No. 10433 of 2015 (D) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER:

-------------------------- T. M. SALEEM JASMINES, THEERVEEDU ROAD BEACH P.O., CALICUT - 673 032 BY ADVS.SRI.V.V.ASOKAN (SR.) SRI.P.RAHUL SRI.M.AYUB KHAN RESPONDENTS:

---------------------------- 1.

THE ASSISTANT ENGINEER ELECTRICAL SECTION KSEB BEACH KOZHIKODE - 673 001 2.

ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER ELECTRICAL SUB DIVISION KSEB, NADAKKAVU KOZHIKODE - 673 011 3.

MOHAMMED SALI THE ASSISTANT ENGINEER ELECTRICAL SECTION KSEB BEACH KOZHIKODE - 673 001 4.

CONSUMER GRIEVANCES REDRESSAL FORUM KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD NORTHERN REGION, GANDHI ROAD KOZHIKODE - 673 032 REPRESENTED BY DEPUTY CHIEF ENGINEER R1 & R2 BY ADV. SRI.SAJEEVKUMAR K.GOPAL, SC, KSEB BY SRI.JAICE JACOB, SC, KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 31-03-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

WP(C).No. 10433 of 2015 (D) APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS ------------------------------------- P1 :

COPY OF THE ENERGY BILL IN RESPECT OF CONSUMER NO. 13846 P1(a) : COPY OF THE RECEIPT EVIDENCING THE REMITTANCE OF ENERGY CHARGES AGAINST EXT. P1 BILL P2 :

COPY OF THE ENERGY BILL IN RESPECT OF CONSUMER NO. 17018 P2(a) : COPY OF THE RECEIPT EVIDENCING REMITTANCE OF ENERGY CHARGES AGAINST EXT. P2 BILL P3 :

COPY OF THE ENERGY BILL IN RESPECT OF CONSUMER NO. 17019 P3(a) : COPY OF THE RECEIPT EVIDENCING REMITTANCE OF ENERGY CHARGES AGAINST EXT. P3 BILL P4 :

PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE PREMISES P4(a): PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE PREMISES P5:

COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE 4TH RESPONDENT IN O.P. 73/2014-15 P6:

COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT PROPOSING DISCONNECTION OF CONSUMER NOS. 13846, 17018, 17019 P7:

COPY OF THE REPLY GIVEN BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS:- NIL --------------------------------------- /TRUE COPY/ P.A. TO JUDGE DCS

V. CHITAMBARESH, J --------------------------------------- W.P.(C). NO. 10433 OF 2015 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 31st day of March, 2015

JUDGMENT

Ext. P6 notice of disconnection has been issued on the basis of Ext. P5 order of the Consumer Grievance Redressal Forum. The allegation against the petitioner is that he is enjoying three different electricity connections to a single premises wherein industrial activity is done. The petitioner has earlier damaged an electricity post which prompted him to move the Consumer Grievance Redressal Forum which passed Ext. P5 order. It is stated therein as follows:- "The respondents have committed that there is more than one connection in the same premises for the same purpose, which contravenes regulation 52 of Supply Code, 2014. Above all, these connections are emanating from feeders from two difference substations, which is highly against the principles of safety. Due to this supply arrangement, while a shut down work is being taken up in one station, back feeding can occur from the other feeder from the other station, leading to equipment damage and certain human fatality. This highly objectionable and

W.P.(C). NO. 10433 OF 2015 2 shall be corrected by the licensee immediately, after ensuring all necessary formalities and procedures as per existing rules."

2.

The workers engaged in the industrial activity would be put to peril if three independent electricity connections are simultaneously enjoyed for one and the same premises. Whether the premises are totally independent and not interconnected is a matter for factual adjudication.

3.

The petitioner is free to object to Ext. P6 notice which has been done by Ext. P7 explanation. The second respondent shall consider Ext. P7 explanation filed to Ext. P6 notice and take the proceedings to a logical end. Needless to say that the petitioner will be put on notice and heard in the exercise before final orders are passed within a period of one month.

The writ petition is disposed of.

V. CHITAMBARESH JUDGE DCS