IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 16140 of 2010(N)
1. M/S. CUSTOMER LINE PRIVATE LTD.,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD,
... Respondent
2. ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER,
For Petitioner :SRI.ZAKEER HUSSAIN
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON
Dated :26/05/2010
O R D E R
P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, J
--------------------------------------------
WP(C) NO. 16140 OF 2010
--------------------------------------------
Dated this the 26th day of May, 2010
JUDGMENT
The petitioner has approached this Court with the following prayers:
(i) Issue a writ of certiorari or any other
appropriate writ order or direction to quash Exts.P6 and
P8;
(ii) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other
appropriate writ, order or direction directing the Asst.
Engineer to take a decision on Ext.P7 and P9;
(iii) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other
appropriate writ, order or direction directing the
respondents not to take any steps to recover amounts
covered by the impugned bills at the LT 7 tariff, nor to
disconnect the connection provided to the petitioner’s
premises for non payment of bills under the impugned bills;
(iv) To declare that the petitioner is not liable to
be treated as a call centre and therefore not liable to pay
electricity tariff under LT 7 A.
(v) Grant such other reliefs as are just and
proper in the nature of this case.
2. The learned standing counsel appearing for the respondent
submits that the petitioner is very much having an effective alternate
remedy, if aggrieved in any manner, by approaching the Consumer
Grievance Redressal Forum and hence that the Writ Petition is not
maintainable at all. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner intends to avail the statutory remedy, but was constrained to
2
WP(C) No. 16140/2010
approach this Court by filing the Writ Petition because of the coercive
steps stated as being pursued by the respondent, causing disconnection
of electric supply.
3. Considering the facts and circumstances, the petitioner is
permitted to avail the statutory remedy by filing necessary proceedings
before the Chairman, CGRF, Ernakulam, against the impugned bills. If any
such proceedings are filed within one week from the date of receipt of a
copy of this judgment, the same shall be considered and appropriate
orders shall be passed after hearing the petitioner as expeditiously as
possible, at any rate, within two weeks thereafter. So as to enable the
petitioner to pursue such exercise, the respondents are directed not to
disconnect the electric supply in respect of the present cause of action, for
a period of one month and it will be subject to the orders to be passed by
the CGRF, Ernakulam. The Chairman CGRF, Ernakulam is ‘suo-motu’
impleaded as the additional 3rd respondent in the Writ Petition and the
learned standing counsel entered appearance on the said additional
respondent as well.
The Writ Petition is disposed of as above.
P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON
JUDGE
dnc