IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
OP No. 14767 of 2002(G)
1. A.K.RAJA ANWAR S/O.P.B.KUNJU MOHAMMED
... Petitioner
Vs
1. THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER,
... Respondent
2. THE DEPUTY TAHSILDAR (REVENUE RECOVERY)
3. T.C.JULIAT,H.NO.II/581,D/O.LATE CHACKO,
For Petitioner :SRI.T.A.SHAJI
For Respondent :SRI.C.C.THOMAS, SC, K.S.E.B
The Hon'ble MR. Justice KURIAN JOSEPH
Dated :12/12/2006
O R D E R
KURIAN JOSEPH, J.
-----------------------------------------
O.P.No. 14767 of 2002
-----------------------------------------
Dated this the 12th day of December, 2006
JUDGMENT
The challenge is on the recovery steps initiated as per Ext.P3. It
is seen that the same is in respect of arrears of energy charges from
12/2001 to 2/2002. According to the petitioner he had transferred the
property to the 3rd respondent as early as in 1996 as per Ext.P1 and the
intimation thereof was given as per Ext.P2. The contention of the
Board is that no such intimation was received. Be that as it may, it is
admitted in the counter affidavit that the connection was dismantled on
18-12-2001. If that be so, there cannot be any arrears in respect of a
dismantled connection after dismantlement. Apparently there is a
mistake in Ext.P3. It is also to be noted that at the very premises where
the connection was originally given there is another service connection.
Under the Conditions of Supply of Electrical Energy there cannot be a
service connection in the premises in respect of which there is arrears
by way of an earlier electric connection. The 3rd respondent has stated
in Ext.R1(b) that he has since transferred the property to another
OP NO.14767/2002
-:2:-
person. Therefore, I quash Ext.P3 making it clear that it will be open to
respondents 1 and 2 to realise the arrears, if any, in respect of the
premises from the 3rd respondent or the subsequent transferee, where
there is still a service connection.
The writ petition is disposed of as above.
(KURIAN JOSEPH, JUDGE)
ahg.
KURIAN JOSEPH, J.
O.P.NO.14767/2002
JUDGMENT
12th December, 2006