← Library
High Court of KeralaWP(C)/27777/2015disposed of

Abdul Rasheed @ Dr.A.R.Babu v. The Kerala State Electricity Board Limited

2015-09-22Honourable Dr. Justice A.K.Jayasankaran Nambiar5 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT:

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR TUESDAY, THE 22ND DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2015/31ST BHADRA, 1937 WP(C).NO. 27777 OF 2015 (V) ---------------------------- PETITIONER(S):

-------------- ABDUL RASHEED @ DR.A.R.BABU MANAGING DIRECTOR HEERA CONSTRUCTION COMPANY PVT.LTD., M.P. APPAN ROAD VAZHUTHACAUD, THIRUVANATHAPURAM REPRESENTED BY HIS POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER K.K. SUDHAKARAN, ASSISTANT GENERAL MANAGER REGIONAL OFFICE, HEERA CONSTRUCTION COMPANY PTV.LTD NATIONAL RESIDENCY, BANK JUNCTION, EDAPPALLY KCHI-682 024 BY ADV. SRI.K.PRAVEEN KUMAR RESPONDENT(S):

---------------

1. THE KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD LIMITED REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, VYDHUTI BHAVAN THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001

2. THE DEPUTY CHIEF ENGINEER, ELECTRICAL CIRCLE KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD LIMITED ERNAKULAM-682 018

3. THE ASSISTANT ENGINEER KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD LIMITED ELECTRICAL SECTION, THRIKKAKARA, ERNAKULAM-682 021

4. THE SUB ENGINEER KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD LIMITED ELECTRICAL SECTION, THRIKKAKARA, ERNAKULAM-682 021

5. KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY APPELLATE AUTHORITY CC-51/52, NEAR 110 KV SUB STATION, VYTTILA KOCHI-682 019

6. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, POWER DEPARTMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.LILLY K.T R BY SRI.JAICE JACOB,SC,KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22-09-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

WP(C).NO. 27777 OF 2015 (V) ---------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS ------------------------- EXT.P1: TRUE COPY OF THE MAHAZAR DT. 6/5/15 ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT EXT.P2: TRUE COPY OF THE COVERING LETTER ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT EXT.P2(A): TRUE COPY OF THE PROVISIONAL BILL AND CALCULATION STATEMENT ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT EXT.P3: TRUE COPY OF THE OBJECTION PREFERRED BY THE PETITIONER DT. 12/5/15 EXT.P4: TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DT. 25/5/15 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT EXT.P5: TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL PREFERRED BY THE PETITIONER EXT.P5(A): TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION PREFERRED ALONG WITH THE APPEAL EXT.P5(B): TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION SEEKING TO EXEMPT THE PETITIONER FROM PAYING THE 50% OF THE FINE AMOUNT FILED ALONG WITH THE APPEAL EXT.P6: THE TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WP CNO 17246/2015 DT.

10/6/15 EXT.P7: THE TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WA NO 1255/15 DT. 25/6/15 EXT.P8: THE TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION SENT BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT TO THE 5TH RESPONDENT EXT.P9: THE TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN APPEAL NO. 300/2015 DT. 29/7/15 PASSED BY THE 5TH RESPONDENT EXT.P10: THE TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DT. 9/9/15 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS:NIL ----------------------- //TRUE COPY// P.

A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR, J.

............................................................. Dated this the 22nd day of September, 2015 J U D G M E N T The petitioner is the Managing Director of a firm engaged in business of land development. Challenging Ext.P4 order whereby it was assessed to energy charges at an exorbitant rate, the petitioner preferred an appeal before the appellate authority under Section 127 of the Electricity Act, 2003. The petitioner had also challenged Ext.P4 bill before this Court which proceedings eventually culminated in Ext.P7 judgment in W.A.No.1255 of 2015 that relegated the petitioner to the alternate remedy under the Electricity Act, against Ext.P4 bill. The petitioner, therefore, approached the appellate authority and effected the statutory deposit of 50% of the amounts confirmed in Ext.

P4 bill within the extended time that was permitted to the petitioner by the Division Bench of this Court in Ext.P7 judgment. Thereafter, the appellate authority passed Ext.P9 order wherein the payment of 50% of the amounts confirmed against the petitioner by Ext.P4 bill was taken as insufficient for the purposes of entertaining the appeal. It is under these circumstances, that Ext.P9 order, that dismissed the appeal preferred by the petitioner, and Ext.P10 consequential demand notice, have been impugned in the present writ petition.

2. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing counsel for the respondent Board.

3. On a consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions made across the bar, I find that, inasmuch as the petitioner had effected payment of 50% of the assessed amount in Ext.P4, within the extended period of time that was granted to him by the Division Bench of this Court in Ext.P7 judgment, the dismissal of the appeal by the appellate authority on the ground of non-compliance with the requirement of statutory pre-deposit cannot be legally sustained. Accordingly, I quash Ext.P9 order, as also Ext.P10 consequential order, and direct the 5th respondent appellate authority to consider the appeal preferred by the petitioner against Ext.P4 bill on merits and pass a fresh order in the matter after hearing the petitioner. The 5th respondent shall pass orders as directed within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

The writ petition is disposed as above.

A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE mns