IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM TUESDAY, THE 16TH JUNE 2009 / 26TH JYAISHTA 1931 WP(C).No. 10375 of 2004(I) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- M/S.LIRIL PLASTICS, ELANJIPRA.P.O., CHALAKUDY, REPRESENTED BY ITS PROPRIETOR. BY ADV. SRI.J.JULIAN XAVIER SRI.FIROZ K.ROBIN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, VYDYUTHI BHAVAN, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. DEPUTY CHIEF ENGINEER, APTS, KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, ELECTRICAL MAJOR SECTION, CHALAKUDY. 4. ASSISTANT ENGINEER, KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, ELECTRICAL SECTION, PARIYARAM. 5. CHIEF VIGILANCE OFFICER, APTS, VYDYUTHI BHAVANAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 6. PRASAD MATHEW, ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, APTS, KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, PALAKKAD. ADV. SRI.P.SANTHALINGAM, SC, KSEB FOR R1TOR5 SRI.C.K.KARUNAKARAN, SC FOR KSEB FOR R1TO R6 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 16/06/2009 , THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).10375/04 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:- EXT.P1:-TRUE COPY OF CHART SHOWING THE REMITTANCE FOR THE YEARS 2002- 03 & 2003-04 EXT.P2:-TRUE COPY OF THE MAHAZAR PREPARED BY R6 EXT.P3:-TRUE COPY OF THE BILL DT.20.3.04 ISSUED BY R4 EXT.P4:-TRUE COPY OF THE PETIITON DT.18.3.04 EXT.P5:-TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION DT.20.3.04 FILED BEFORE R5 EXT.P6:-TRUE COPY OF PETITION DT.19.3.04 FILED BEFORE ELE.INSPECTOR, THRISSUR EXT.P7:-TRUE PHOTOS OF THE OUTER CHAMBER OF THE METER BOX EXT.P8:- TRUE COPY OF THE OBJECTION DT.24.6.04 EXT.P9:- TRUE COPY OF THE COVER WITH ENDORSEMENT EXT.P10:- TRUE COPY OF REPLY DT.16.4.04 ISSUED BY ELE.INSPECTOR,THRISSUR RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS:- NIL okb //True Copy// P.A. to Judge C.K.ABDUL REHIM, J. ------------------------------ W.P.(C)No.10375 OF 2004 ------------------------------ Dated this the 16th day of June, 2009 J U D G M E N T ---------------------- 1. The challenge in this writ petition is against Ext.P3 penal bill issued under the provisions of Section 126 of the Electricity Act, 2003. Pursuant to an inspection conducted at the industrial unit of the petitioner by the 'Anti Power Theft Squad', the petitioner was imposed with penal Electricity charges to the tune of Rs.4,77,367/-. According to the petitioner the allegation contained in Ext.P2 mahazar prepared at the time of inspection is totally incorrect and fabricated. It is the complaint of the petitioner that the penal Electricity charges was imposed on a totally untenable ground. The petitioner had submitted Ext.P5 complaint against the action of the inspecting team to the Chief Vigilance Officer of the 1st respondent Board and also to the Regional Electrical Inspector. The grievance of the petitioner is that none of the authorities had considered his complaints so far. 2. This Court, by an interim order dated 26.3.2004, had directed the petitioner to file objections against the bill before the authority who had issued the bill, and also directed that the objection of the petitioner should be considered and appropriate W.P.(C) No.10375/04 2 order should be passed on the same. The recovery of the amount covered under Ext.P2 bill was stayed on condition of the petitioner paying an amount of Rs.1,00,000/-. It is submitted that after payment of Rs.1 lakh petitioner had filed objections against Ext.P2 bill as evidenced by Ext.P8. But the 4th respondent has not so far taken any decision on the complaint. 3. Under Section 126 of the Electricity Act, 2003, before finalizing imposition of any penal charges the authority concerned need to issue a provisional assessment to the consumer and he should be afforded with an opportunity to file objections. A reasonable opportunity of hearing also should be afforded to the consumer before such finalization. Hence Ext.P3 can only be considered as a provisional assessment. It need be finalized considering the objections raised in Ext.P8, after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. The petitioner is free to take all the contentions raised in this writ petition before finalization of the Bill, if necessary by filing additional objections. In the result, the writ petition is disposed of directing the 4th respondent to pass appropriate orders on the basis of Ext.P8 objections and further objections if any submitted against Ext.P2 provisional assessment, as early as possible. If the petitioner W.P.(C) No.10375/04 3 had already remitted the amount of Rs.1 lakh ordered by this Court, recovery of the balance amount covered under Ext.P2 shall be kept in abeyance till final orders are passed by the 4th respondent in accordance with Section 126(3) of the Electricity Act, 2003, and copy of such order is served on the petitioner. Needless to say that the petitioner can pursue appellate remedy available against such decision, if he is aggrieved. C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE. okb