IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM FRIDAY, THE 23RD JULY 2010 / 1ST SRAVANA 1932 WA.No. 1263 of 2010() --------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER IN WPC.22374/2010 Dated 16/07/2010 .................... APPELLANT(S)/PETITIONER: -------------- KERALA STATE RICE MILLS OWNERS ASSOCIATION, KALADY - 683 574. REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. BY ADV. SMT.SADHANA KUMARI ESWARI RESPONDENT(S/RESPONDENTS --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF POWER, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, VIDYUTHI BHAVAN, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN. PIN 695004 3. THE ASSISTANT ENGINEER, ELECTRICAL SECTION, KALAMASSERY (SECTION), PIN - 683 014. 4. THE ASSISTANT ENGINEER, ELECTRICAL SECTION, KSEB, KALADY, PIN - 683 574. 5. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, ELECTRICAL DIVISION, KSEB, PERUMBAVOOR - 683 542. R1 BY SR. GOVT. PLEADER SRI.VTK MOHANAN R2 TO R5 BY ADV. SRI.C.K.KARUNAKARAN THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23-07-2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS C. KURIAKOSE & C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JJ. ----------------------------------------------- WA. No. 1263 of 2010 ----------------------------------------------- Dated this the 23rd day of July, 2010 J U D G M E N T Abdul Rehim, J. This appeal s preferred against an interlocutory order of the learned single Judge. Assessment made under Section 126 of the Electricity Act of 2003 was under challenge in the writ petition. On the allegation of unauthorized additional load, penalty was imposed at two times on the fixed charges, for a previous period of 365 days. According to the appellant since there is no proper appellate authority notified under Section 127 of the Act read with the relevant Rules, the assessment was challenged directly in a writ petition. The impugned assessment is challenged interalia contending that even assuming that there is unauthorized additional load, assessment can be made only at LT VIIA tariff. In this case fixed charges at the rate of Rs.50/- per day is assessed, on the basis that unauthorized additional load can be penalized under LT VIII tariff, which is the rate WA. 1263/10 -2- applicable for temporary authorized extensions. It is conceded by learned standing counsel appearing for the respondent Board that, whether assessment under Section 126 can be made under LT VIII tariff is an issue pending adjudication in other writ appeals before this Court. Even though the learned single Judge, exercising his discretion, has has only imposed a condition for payment of Rs.50,000/-, the appellant submitted that the same will result in unworkable situation, the appellant being an association. The interim order if insisted to be complied with will put the appellant to severe prejudice, is the contention. 2. Even though we are not at all inclined to interfere with the interlocutory order, which is purely discretionary in nature, we are mindful of the strong contest on the issue as to whether penal assessment can be made under LT VIII tariff. Since it is noticed that the said issue is pending decision before this Court, we are inclined to have slight WA. 1263/10 -3- modification of the impugned order. Considering the totality of circumstance attendant in this case, we are of the opinion that disconnection of electric supply to the petitioner's premises shall be kept in abeyance till disposal of the writ petition, on condition of the petitioner remitting a sum of Rs.25,000/-. In the result, the writ appeal is partly allowed. The impugned order of the learned single Judge is modified to the extent of reducing the condition imposed, from Rs.50,000/- to Rs.25,000/-. If appellant makes payment of the said amount within a period of two weeks from today, the electric supply to the petitioner's premises shall not be disconnected. (PIUS C.KURIAKOSE, JUDGE) (C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE) ksv/-