Aliyarukunju vs The Kerala State Electricity … on 12 May, 2009

       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WA.No. 1010 of 2009()


1. ALIYARUKUNJU,PROPRIETOR,T.K.M.BRICKS,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. THE KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD,
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE DEPUTY CHIEF ENGINEER, KERALA STATE

3. THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER,

4. THE SUB ENGINEER IN CHARGE OF ASSISTANT

5. THE ELECTRICAL INSPECTOR, OFFICE OF THE

                For Petitioner  :SRI.JOHNSON GOMEZ

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice V.GIRI
The Hon'ble MR. Justice C.K.ABDUL REHIM

 Dated :12/05/2009

 O R D E R
                             V.GIRI &
                    C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JJ.
               --------------------------------------------
                       W.A.No.1010 of 2009
              ---------------------------------------------
               Dated this the 12th day of May, 2009.


                           JUDGMENT

C.K.ABDUL REHIM, J.

The writ petition is filed challenging Ext.P11 order of

the appellate authority through which the penal bill imposed upon

the petitioner under Section 126 of the Electricity Act, 2003 is

confirmed. The appellant submits that as per Ext.P7 report of the

Electrical Inspector issued after testing of the energy meter, will

clearly reveal that there is no theft committed in the case. The

remarks of the testing authority in Ext.P7 reads as follows:

“The conditions of the seals and screws were

as shown in para 1. The meter was tested in the

received condition and seen that the meter is having

a positive error. The counter was working properly

and no irregularity or evidence for tempering, as

recorded in the site mahassar was noticed.”

2. In the circumstances, the sustainability of the

proceedings imposing penalty need be examined in the writ

petition, afresh based on Ext.P7. Therefore insistence for part

payment imposed by the Single Judge will work out in causing

prejudice to the petitioner. Hence, we are inclined to interfere with

the interim order passed in the writ petition on 20.3.2009, which is

W.A.No.1010 of 2009

:: 2 ::

impugned in this writ appeal, to the extent it imposes condition for

payment of Rs.20,000/-.

In the result, the writ appeal is allowed and the order

impugned is modified deleting the condition for payment of

Rs.20,000/- imposed therein. The writ petition may be posted for

disposal immediately on re-opening of the court after mid-summer

holidays.

Sd/-

(V.GIRI)
JUDGE

Sd/-

(C.K.ABDUL REHIM)
JUDGE

sk/

//true copy//

P.S. to Judge