IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR TUESDAY, THE 18TH JANUARY 2011 / 28TH POUSHA 1932 WP(C).No. 37332 of 2004(T) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------ KOCHUMMAN, SON OF LATE UNNOONNI, PROPRIETOR, MINI CASHEW FACTORY, NELLILA P.O., KOLLAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.K.B.PRADEEP RESPONDENTS: --------------------- 1. THE KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, VIDHYUTHI BHAVAN, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY. 2. THE DIVISIONAL ENGINEER, KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, KUNDARA, KOLLAM DISTRICT. 3. THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, VELIYAM, KOLLAM DISTRICT. 4. THE ASSISTANT ENGINEER, KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, PERUMPUZHA, KOLLAM DISTRICT. R1 TO R4 BY ADVS. SRI.P.SANTHALINGAM, SC, KSEB SRI.C.K.KARUNAKARAN, SC FOR KSEB THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 18/01/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 37332 of 2004(T) -------------------------------------- APPENDIX --------------- PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS ----------------------------------- EXT.P1. COPY OF THE CIRCULAR DATED 19.4.03 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXT.P2. COPY OF THE BILL DATED 1.11.04. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS : NIL -------------------------------------- / TRUE COPY / P.A. TO JUDGE VK T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C)No. 37332 OF 2004 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 18th day of January, 2011 J U D G M E N T The challenge raised by the petitioner herein is against the action taken to adopt LT - VII Tariff to the petitioner's processing unit. It is pointed out that the petitioner's unit is a cashew processing unit and not a cashew factory. 2. The learned Standing Counsel pointed out that the petitioner is the successor in interest and therefore, the application for change of ownership and tariff have not been filed by the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the tariff applicable is only LT-IV. 3. This Court passed an interim order dated 21.12.2004 as prayed for in the writ petition with a direction that every month, the Board shall inform the petitioner, the amount he must have paid, if the tariff is treated as LT-VII A. The petitioner shall give bank guarantee for the difference between the two bills, every month. 4. In the light of the stand taken, it is only appropriate WPC.No.37332/2004 : 2 : that the petitioner is allowed an opportunity to furnish a proper application for change of ownership as well as tariff. If an appropriate application is filed within one month along with a copy of this judgment, it will be considered and a decision will be taken with regard to the same as sought for by the petitioner within a further period of two months. Till such a decision is taken, the interim order passed by this Court will continue. This writ petition is disposed of as above. No costs. (T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE) jma