Benhur Joseph Manayani vs Kerala State Electricity Board on 18 January, 2010

       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 1108 of 2010(K)


1. BENHUR JOSEPH MANAYANI, AGED 32,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD,
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER,

3. THE ELECTRICAL INSPECTOR,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.JOHNSON MANAYANI

                For Respondent  :SRI.P.P.THAJUDEEN, SC, K.S.E.B

The Hon'ble MR. Justice P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON

 Dated :18/01/2010

 O R D E R
              P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J.
                -----------------------------------------------
                        WP(C) No. 1108 of 2010
                     ---------------------------------------
              Dated, this the 18th day of January, 2010


                             J U D G M E N T

The challenge involved in this Writ Petition is in respect of the

exorbitant bill raised as borne by Ext.P1, without any regard to the

actual consumption of the energy, which necessitated filing of Ext.P2

complaint before the respondents 2 and 3 and stated as not acted upon.

2. The learned Standing Counsel appearing for the

respondents submits that, the concerned electric meter has been found

faulty and the same has been replaced. It is brought to the notice of this

Court by the learned standing counsel that, pursuant to the remedial

measures, a revised bill has been issued, showing the liability of the

petitioner only as Rs.900/- and that the same has been satisfied by the

petitioner on 14.01.2010 and hence that nothing further survives in the

Writ Petition.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner however submits that

the grievance projected in Ext.P2, in respect of the previous bills is still

to be acted upon and that the respondents having realized the actual

facts and figures and corrected Ext.P1 bill, are liable to look into the

position with regard to the previous bills as well.

WP(C) No.1108/2010
2

4. The learned standing counsel submits that, the grievance of

the petitioner with regard to the previous bills can very well be agitated by

filing appropriate proceedings before the Consumer Grievance Redressal

Forum. Reserving the rights and liberties of the petitioner in this regard,

the Writ Petition is closed. On filing any complaint before the Consumer

Grievance Redressal Forum as above, the same shall be caused to be

considered on merits and shall be finalized as expeditiously as possible.

P. R. RAMACHANDRA MENON
JUDGE
dnc