IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON WEDNESDAY, THE 31ST MARCH 2010 / 10TH CHAITHRA 1932 WP(C).No. 11139 of 2010(N) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- SUBRAMANIAN V., GURUVAYOOR RESORTS, NEAR PARTHASARATHY TEMPLE, GURUVAYOOR. BY ADV. SRI.P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN SRI.HANSON.P.MATHEW RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. ASSISTANT ENGINEER, ELECTRICAL SECTION, KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD,GURUVAYOOR. 2. ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, ELECTRICAL SUB DIVISION, KERALA STAE ELECTRICITY BOARD, GURUVAYOOR. 3. EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, ELECTRICAL DIVISION, KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD,KUNNAMKULAM. 4. KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, VAIDHUTHI BHAVAN, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. STANDING COUNSEL SRI.P.P.THAJUDEEN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 31/03/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, J. ------------------------ W.P.(C)No. 11139 OF 2010 ------------------------ Dated this the 31st day of March, 2010 JUDGMENT The petitioner is challenging Ext.P2 series of proceedings issued by the first respondent, whereby the petitioner has been directed to offer explanation within 24 hours, lest his connection should be cut off and simultaneously instructed the petitioner to remove the unauthorised additional connected load. The grievance of the petitioner is that, absolutely no factual data is discernible from Ext.P2 series of proceedings and that the petitioner is virtually prevented from offering any satisfactory explanation with reference to the relevant facts. It is contended that the time stipulated in Ext.P2 to have explanation submitted within 24 hours is quite unsustainable under any circumstances. It is also contended that absolutely no mahazar whatsoever was prepared by the respondents in relation to the inspection stated as made and as such, the petitioner is virtually lying in the dark as to the explanation to be offered. 2. Heard the learned Standing Counsel for the Board, who WPC NO. 11139/2010 -2- submits that the statement submitted in Ext.P2(d) is very much in conformity with the statutory requirements. However, with regard to the other allegations, the learned Standing Counsel submits that the position is clearly stated in Ext.P2(d) itself as to the necessity to have installed a transformer, as the connected load exceeds 50 KVA. The learned standing counsel also submits that if the petitioner approaches the first respondent for further details if any, the same will be supplied within one week from the date of filing of an application in that regard. 3. In the above facts and circumstances, the petitioner is permitted to file an application before the first respondent seeking clarification of the factual position. On receiving such application, all necessary materials shall be furnished by the first respondent within one week thereafter, upon which the petitioner shall file necessary statement of objections within a further period of two weeks, if so advised. The proceedings shall be finalised by the first respondent after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and also taking note of the objections stated to be preferred from the part of the petitioner. Subject to the above, all further proceedings stated as being pursued WPC NO. 11139/2010 -3- against the petitioner shall be kept in abeyance. The Writ Petition is disposed of as above. P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE dpk