M/S.Solar Products vs The Assistant Engineer on 14 January, 2011

       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 1365 of 2011(U)


1. M/S.SOLAR PRODUCTS, MUDICKAL P.O.,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. THE ASSISTANT ENGINEER,
                       ...       Respondent

                For Petitioner  :SRI.E.K.NANDAKUMAR

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

The Hon'ble MR. Justice P.N.RAVINDRAN

 Dated :14/01/2011

 O R D E R
                       P.N.RAVINDRAN, J.
             -----------------------------------------
                   W.P(C).No.1365 of 2011
             -----------------------------------------
          Dated this the 14th day of January, 2011

                           JUDGMENT

The petitioner firm is a consumer of electrical energy. The

business premises of the petitioner firm was inspected by the

respondent on 28.12.2010. Thereafter Ext.P1 provisional order

accompanied by Ext.P2 invoice was issued demanding payment of

the sum of Rs.20,90,050/-. Upon receipt of Ext.P1 provisional

order the petitioner submitted Ext.P3 objections dated 8.1.2011.

Two days thereafter the sole respondent issued Ext.P4 letter

informing the petitioners that they are liable to pay the sum of

Rs.20,90,050/- as penalty for unauthorised use of energy. Ext.P4

is under challenge in this writ petition. The main contention

raised by the petitioner is that under Regulation 51(3) of the

Kerala State Electricity Board Terms and Conditions of Supply,

2005 and section 126(3) of the Electricity Act, 2003 the

respondent had a duty to hear the petitioner and pass a final

order and that having not been done, Ext.P4 cannot be sustained.

2. Sri.P.P.Thajudeen, learned standing counsel appearing

W.P(C).No.1365 of 2011
-:2:-

for the respondent Board fairly conceded that before Ext.P4 was

issued the respondent ought to have issued a final order

determining the amount payable, after affording the petitioner an

opportunity of being heard. The learned standing counsel

submitted that the respondent will hear the petitioner and pass a

final order after adverting to the various contentions raised in

Ext.P3. In the light of the submissions made at the Bar and

having regard to the fact that before Ext.P4 was issued the

petitioner was not heard and the petitioner’s contentions were not

considered and a final order in terms of Regulation 51(3) of the

Kerala State Electricity Board Terms and Conditions of Supply,

2005 and section 126(3) of the Electricity Act, 2003 was not

passed, I allow the writ petition, quash Ext.P4 and direct the

respondent to pass a final order after adverting to the contentions

raised by the petitioner in Ext.P3 reply and after affording the

petitioner an opportunity of being heard. Till such time, the

demand made in Exts.P1 and P2 shall not be enforced.

P.N.RAVINDRAN,
Judge.

ahg.

P.N.RAVINDRAN, J.

—————————

W.P(C).No.1365 of 2011

—————————-

JUDGMENT

14th January, 2011