IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH WEDNESDAY, THE 26TH NOVEMBER 2008 / 5TH AGRAHAYANA 1930 WP(C).No. 34870 of 2008(A) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- DOUGLAS ANTONY, MOUNT CARMAL ESTATE, KAILASANADA, CHANDANAPARA, MAVADI P.O., NEDUMKANDAM, IDUKKI. BY ADV. SRI.BIJI MATHEW SRI.SUJITH KUMAR RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, K.S.E.BOARD, VYDHYUTHI BHAVAN, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, ELECTRICAL SECTION, KULAMAVU, IDUKKI. 3. ASSISTANT ENGINEER, KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, ELECTRICAL SECTION, NEDUMKANDOM. 4. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, OFFICE OF THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, IDUKKI. 5. THE DEPUTY TAHSILDAR (RR), UDUMPAMCHOLA, IDUKKI. 6. THE CONSUMERS GRIEVANCE REDRESSAL FORUM, (CENTRAL REGION), THE KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, POWER HOUSE, ERNAKULAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. BY ADV.SRI.P.P.THAJUDEEN, SC, KSEB, R1, 2, 3, 6 GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.BEJOY CHANDRAN , R4, 5 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 26/11/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.M. JOSEPH, J. ```````````````````````````````````````````````````` W.P.(C) No. 34870 OF 2008 A ```````````````````````````````````````````````````` Dated this the 26th day of November, 2008 J U D G M E N T Petitioner challenges Exts.P4, P5 and P7. He seeks a direction to dispose of Ext.P6. Ext.P6 is a petition filed before the Consumer Grievance Redressal Forum, Ernakulam. Since the matter is pending before the Consumer Grievance Redressal Forum, I do not see any reason to consider the challenge against Exts.P4 and P5. 2. Learned standing counsel takes notice for respondents 1, 2, 3 and 6. Learned Government Pleader takes notice for respondents 4 and 5. The reason stated does not seem to me as incorrect. The fact that revenue recovery proceedings are already initiated should not have stood in the way of the authority granting interim relief if a case is otherwise made out. There is no discussion on the merits. Having regard to the facts, I feel that the matter need not be directed to be reconsidered. Ext.P7 is quashed. It is ordered that Ext.P6 will be decided within a period of two WPC.34870/08 : 2 : months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment with an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. In the meantime, if the petitioner remits Rs.1 lakh within two weeks from today, recovery proceedings will be kept in abeyance till a decision is so taken. Writ petition is disposed of as above. Sd/- (K.M.JOSEPH, JUDGE) aks // TRUE COPY // P.A. TO JUDGE