K.R.Bharathan vs The Kerala State Electricity … on 24 April, 2009

       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 12752 of 2009(L)


1. K.R.BHARATHAN, S/O. RAGHAVAN,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



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

2. THE ASISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.K.R.VINOD

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice V.K.MOHANAN

 Dated :24/04/2009

 O R D E R
                       V.K.MOHANAN, J.
                  ---------------------------------------
                 W.P.(C) No.12752 OF 2009
                  ---------------------------------------
             Dated this the 24th day of April, 2009


                           JUDGMENT

The petitioner is a consumer of the Kerala State

Electricity Board with consumer No.5562016847 given to his

building and the category of connection come under LT 1 (a)

tariff. According to the petitioner, the said building is

occupied by the tenant as per Ext.P1 agreement and he is

remitting an average bill amount of Rs.645/- with respect to

the said building and the consumption of electricity is below

250 units. Ext.P2, bill dated 16.01.2009, show the average

consumption of electricity. According to the petitioner, as per

Ext.P3 bill, the Board demanded an amount of Rs.12,825/-,

which is exorbitant and no electricity power has consumed so

as to pay such a huge amount. Aggrieved by Ext.P3 bill, the

petitioner has preferred Ext.P4 representation before the

second respondent. The petitioner apprehends that without

considering Ext.P4 representation, the Board would take

arbitrary steps.

W.P.(C) No.12752 of 2009
2

2. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as

well as the Standing Counsel for the K.S.E.B.

3. Having regard to the facts and circumstances

involved in this case, I am of the view that this writ petition

can be disposed of with a direction to consider Ext.P4. In the

result, this writ petition is disposed of directing the second

respondent to take up Ext.P4 representation and dispose of the

same after giving an opportunity of being heard to the

petitioner, at any rate within one month from the date of

receipt of copy of this judgment, which will be produced by the

petitioner.

The writ petition is disposed of accordingly.

V.K.MOHANAN
JUDGE

pac