High Court Kerala High Court

Thomas Mathew vs Kerala State Electricity Board on 24 July, 2008

Kerala High Court
Thomas Mathew vs Kerala State Electricity Board on 24 July, 2008
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 22399 of 2008(N)


1. THOMAS MATHEW
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD
                       ...       Respondent

2. EXECUTIVE ENGINEER

3. ASST.EXECUTIVE ENGINEER

4. ASST.ENGINEER

5. CHAIRMAN

                For Petitioner  :SRI.LIJI.J.VADAKEDOM

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice V.GIRI

 Dated :24/07/2008

 O R D E R
                            V. GIRI, J.
                   -------------------------------
                   WP(C).NO. 22399 of 2008
                  ---------------------------------
           Dated this the 24th       day of July, 2008.

                            JUDGMENT

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the

learned Standing Counsel for KSEB. The petitioner is the

Managing Director of one K.E. Agro Products which has existing

power allocation of 130 H.P. He has sought for an additional

power allocation. It was rejected under Ext.P2 order. The

petitioner approached before the Consumer Grievance Redressal

Forum, which as per Ext.P3 order held that the petitioner was

denied sanction for availing additional power due to inordinate

delay caused by the Board authorities in sanctioning the

additional load. Therefore there is a deficiency of service on the

part of the Board authorities. Nevertheless the petitioner was

directed to approach the Board authorities. Accordingly, the

petitioner has filed Ext.P6 before the Chairman of the Board but

it was not considered by the Board as such.

2. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of directing the

5th respondent to place Ext.P6 before the Board within one

WPC. 22399/2008 2

month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

Thereupon the Board shall take a decision afresh within two

months thereafter, after hearing the petitioner.

V. GIRI, JUDGE.


Pmn/

WPC. 22399/2008    3