IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 14038 of 2010(D)
1. KRISHNA MANOR APARTMENT OWNERS'
... Petitioner
Vs
1. THE KERALA WATER AUTHORITY,
... Respondent
2. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER,
3. ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER,
For Petitioner :SMT.P.P.STELLA
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.SURENDRA MOHAN
Dated :30/04/2010
O R D E R
K.SURENDRA MOHAN, J.
-------------------------------------------
W.P.(C) No.14038 of 2010
-------------------------------------------
Dated this the 30th day of April, 2010
JUDGMENT
The petitioner is an Association of apartment owners
who are occupying a building complex by name ‘Krishna
Manor Apartments’. There are 11 apartments in the
building complex. The petitioner association is registered
under the Travancore Cochin Literary, Scientific and
Charitable Societies Registration Act.
2. The petitioner association has filed this Writ
Petition challenging the exorbitant bills issued to them by
the Kerala Water Authority. It is their specific contention
that water charges are being demanded after issuing bills
in violation of Ext.P6 judgment of this Court. In Ext.P6
judgment, this Court had directed the third respondent to
receive the current bi-monthly water charges from the
petitioner association. As per Ext.P6, this Court had
further directed the petitioner association to file an appeal
challenging the arrears of water charges fixed by the
Kerala Water Authority. Accordingly, the petitioner
association has filed an appeal, a copy of which is Ext.P7.
wpc No.14038/2010 2
However, Ext.P7 appeal is still pending consideration of
the second respondent. The petitioner’s association
complains that in spite of the direction contained in
Ext.P6, the third respondent has refused to accept the
current water charges from the petitioner association from
February 2006. Thereafter, the second respondent is
issuing bills claiming exorbitant amounts as interest and
surcharge. Therefore, the petitioner association contends
that the bills are liable to be quashed. The third
respondent has also threatened to disconnect the supply of
water to the apartment complex. Therefore, they seek
appropriate directions from this Court.
3. The counsel for the Water Authority opposes the
contentions of the petitioner association. According to
him, Ext.P7 has already been disposed of and thereafter,
Ext.P10 bill has been issued. Exts.P12 and P14 show the
amounts that are due and payable by the petitioner
association. According to the counsel for the Water
Authority, unless the amount in Ext.P14 bill is paid,
further action as contemplated by law would be initiated.
4. Having considered the rival contentions of the
wpc No.14038/2010 3
parties and the documents produced in support thereof, I
am of the opinion that since Exts.P7 and P11 are pending
consideration of the second respondent, it is better that
the issue is initially decided by the said authority.
However, for the issue of such a direction to the 5th
respondent, payment of a portion of the amount claimed in
Ext.P14 bill is also necessary.
5. In the above circumstances, this writ petition is
disposed of directing the petitioner to pay an amount of
Rs.32000/-, which represents 50% of the total amount
claimed in Ext.P14 bill, within a period of two weeks from
the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. There shall
be a further direction to the second respondent to
consider Exts.P7 and P11 in accordance with law and to
pass appropriate orders thereon as expeditiously as
possible and at any rate within a period of one month from
the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.
K.SURENDRA MOHAN,
JUDGE
css/