IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 14233 of 2009(Y)
1. TAMAR INDIA SPICES PVT.LTD., VARAPETTY,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD,
... Respondent
2. SENIOR SUPERINTENDENT,
3. ASSISANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER,
For Petitioner :SRI.PEEYUS A.KOTTAM
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice ANTONY DOMINIC
Dated :27/05/2009
O R D E R
ANTONY DOMINIC, J.
================
W.P.(C) NO. 14233 OF 2009 (Y)
=====================
Dated this the 27th day of May, 2009
J U D G M E N T
The petitioner is a small scale industrial unit engaged in
manufacturing spices and curry powders. According to the
petitioner, they started the unit in 2006 and Ext.P1 is the
minimum guarantee agreement. Petitioner admits that in June,
2008, the meter became defective and it was replaced only in
November, 2008. It is stated that around November, 2008, on
account of certain orders they received, the company started
night shift resulting in gradual increase of energy consumption.
Petitioner submits that after a lot of persuasion, the meter was
replaced in November and thereafter the Board reassessed the
consumption as provided in the Act and the Rules and issued
Ext.P10 adopting the average for the three months period
subsequent to November, 2008. Objecting to the demand, the
petitioner filed Ext.P11 before the 3rd respondent. In this writ
petition what they complain is that without dealing with the
objections raised by them, the respondents are demanding for
payment of the amount demanded in Ext.P10.
WPC 14233/09
:2 :
2. Standing counsel appearing for the respondents
submits that in terms of Regulation 37 framed by the Board, the
petitioner ought to have approached the Executive Engineer and
not the Assistant Engineer, before whom Ext.P11 was filed.
Having regard to the provisions contained in Regulation 37 relied
on by the learned standing counsel, I must accept his contention.
3. In the light of the fact that the objection filed by the
petitioner is before the Assistant Engineer, an incompetent
authority, I dispose of this writ petition with the following
directions.
4. That it will be open to the petitioner to approach the
Executive Engineer, the authority competent under Regulation 37,
by filing objections against Ext.P10, the bill issued by the
respondents. It is directed that if such an objection is filed within
10 days from today, the Executive Engineer, Electrical Division,
Muvattupuzha shall consider the objections with notice to the
petitioner and pass appropriate orders in this matter.
5. In the meantime, it is directed that on the petitioner
remitting 50% of the amount due under Ext.P10 within 2 weeks
from today, further coercive action based on Ext.P10 shall be kept
WPC 14233/09
:3 :
in abeyance pending decision by the Executive Engineer as
directed above.
Petitioner shall produce a copy of this judgment before the
Executive Engineer, Muvattupuzha for compliance along with a
copy of this writ petition.
ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE
Rp