High Court Kerala High Court

Nature Life Hospital vs The Assistant Executive Engineer on 5 January, 2010

Kerala High Court
Nature Life Hospital vs The Assistant Executive Engineer on 5 January, 2010
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 34481 of 2009(E)


1. NATURE LIFE HOSPITAL, CHAMBAKKARA,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER,
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER,

3. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, KERALA WATER

4. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY

                For Petitioner  :SRI.N.N.SUGUNAPALAN (SR.)

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR

 Dated :05/01/2010

 O R D E R
                      T.R. Ramachandran Nair, J.
                   - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
                     W.P.(C) No. 34481 of 2009-E
                   - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
               Dated this the 5th day of January, 2010.

                                 JUDGMENT

The petitioner is a hospital engaged in the treatment of nature cure.

Aggrieved by the bills issued by the first respondent, viz. Exts.P3 to P8(a)

and Exts.P10 and P10(a), this writ petition has been filed. It is the case of

the petitioner that exorbitant amounts have been charged in the bills and

actually those amounts are not legally due. While admitting the writ

petition, this Court passed an interim order to deposit 1/4th of the amounts

covered by the impugned demand and accordingly disconnection was

ordered to be stayed.

2. Heard learned Standing Counsel for the Water Authority. It is

submitted that the petitioner has got an effective remedy of approaching the

second respondent who is the Appellate Authority. Ext.P6 is the

representation now filed by the petitioner before the first respondent.

Therefore, the petitioner will have to file a proper appeal before the second

respondent and if such an appeal is filed within a period of three weeks

from today, the same will be entertained and the second respondent will

take a proper decision after hearing the petitioner, within a further period of

wpc 34481/09 2

four months from the date of receipt of the appeal. Since the petitioner has

already remitted 1/4th of the demand as per the interim order passed by this

Court, further recovery will be kept in abeyance till the appeal is disposed

of.

The writ petition is disposed of as above. No costs.

(T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.)

kav/