High Court Kerala High Court

Safiya Beevi vs Kerala State Electricity Board on 26 November, 2008

Kerala High Court
Safiya Beevi vs Kerala State Electricity Board on 26 November, 2008
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 34566 of 2008(M)


1. SAFIYA BEEVI, AGED 50 YEARS,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE ASSISTANT ENGINEER, ELECTRICAL

                For Petitioner  :SRI.M.RAMESH CHANDER

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.M.JOSEPH

 Dated :26/11/2008

 O R D E R
                        K. M. JOSEPH, J.
                 --------------------------------------
                  W.P.C. NO. 34566 OF 2008 M
                  --------------------------------------
               Dated this the 26th November, 2008

                            JUDGMENT

The prayer sought in the Writ Petition is to issue a writ of

mandamus directing or compelling the second respondent to

extend the time granted to pay the amount in instalments as per

Ext.P2 for a further period of six months from the date of the

order. Petitioner fell in arrears towards the Electricity

Department. She approached the Writ Court which granted

instalment facility. Then she approached the Government. On

the basis of the recommendation of the Government, Ext.P1

order was passed permitting payment in twentyfour instalments.

According to the petitioner, she has paid the amount till

26.10.2008. It is stated that due to unforeseen circumstances

regarding price fluctuation, the mill had to be closed down and

the mill is not functioning. Learned standing counsel for the

respondent Electricity Board submits that the petitioner had

approached this Court earlier and in the Writ Petition, obtained

WPC. 34566/08 M 2

an order for permitting her to pay the amount in three

instalments. It is pointed out that the said fact is not even

mentioned in the Writ Petition. He has also submitted that the

petitioner was given twentyfour instalments by the Government.

2. Having regard to the facts and having regard to the

nature of the relief sought, it may not be open to this Court to

direct or compel the second respondent to extend the time

granted as prayed for. The Writ Petition is dismissed.

Sd/=
K. M. JOSEPH, JUDGE

kbk.

// True Copy //

PS to Judge