IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN MONDAY, THE 8TH AUGUST 2011 / 17TH SRAVANA 1933 WP(C).No. 5274 of 2011(H) ------------------------------------ PETITIONER: P.SASEENDRAN, S/O.UNNARAN, AGED 50 YEARS, MANAGING PARTNER, ESSAR INDUSTRIES, MINI INDUSTRIALESTATE, SHED NO.10, UNNIKULAM, BALUSSERY, KOZHIKODE PIN-673 612. BY ADV. SRI.R.PARTHASARATHY SRI.B.V.JOY SANKER RESPONDENTS: 1. THE KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD REP. BY ITS SECRETARY ,KSEB, VYDYUTHI BHAVAN, PATTOM,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM- 695 004. 2. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, KSEB, BALUSSERY, KOZHIKODE 673 612.. 3. ASSISTANT ENGINEER, A P T S UNIT, KSEB, KOZHIKODE- 673 001. 4. ASSISTANT ENGINEER, ELECTRICAL SECTION, UNNIKULAM, BALUSSERY, KOZHIKODE-673 612. BY SMT.P.K.RADHIKA THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08/08/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: APPENDIX IN WPC 5274/2011 PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT. P1 TRUE COPY OF THE SITE MAHAZAR PREPARED BY THE THIRD RESPONDENT DT. 22.1.2011 EXT. P2 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER ISSUED BY THE FOURTH RESPONDENT DT. 28.1.2011 /TRUE COPY/ P.N.Ravindran, J. ------------------------------------------- W.P.(C)No.5274 of 2011 H ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 8th day of August, 2011 JUDGMENT The petitioner is a consumer of electrical energy. This writ petition was filed challenging Ext.P2 demand made pursuant to the inspection conducted at the petitioner's business premises by the Anti Power Theft Squad of Kerala State Electricity Board on 22.1.2011. On inspection, it was found that the meter installed in the petitioner's business premises is faulty for the reason that one phase of the meter was not properly functioning and therefore, based on the average consumption in the other two phases, Ext.P2 demand was made. When the petitioner did not pay the amount demanded under Ext.P2, the electricity supply was disconnected. 2. When the writ petition came up for admission, on noticing that the petitioner has an alternate remedy before the Consumers Grievance Redressal Forum constituted under Section 42(5) of the Electricity Act, 2003, this Court passed an interim order directing restoration of electricity supply on the petitioner depositing the sum of `.10,000/- and paying the reconnection charges. It was also directed that after depositing the said amount, the petitioner can WPC 5274/2011 2 raise a dispute before the Consumers Grievance Redressal Forum and the Forum shall thereupon take an appropriate decision in the matter notwithstanding the pendency of this writ petition. 3. When the matter came up for hearing today, learned counsel on both sides submitted that on payment of the sum of `.10,000/-, electricity connection to the petitioner's business premises was restored and that the petitioner has also moved the Consumers Grievance Redressal Forum. In such circumstances, as the petitioner has invoked the alternate remedy available to him, I am of the opinion that he should pursue the said remedy. I accordingly dispose of the writ petition with a direction to the Consumers Grievance Redressal Forum, whose jurisdiction the petitioner has invoked, to consider the issue and pass appropriate order expeditiously and in any event, within three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment. Until such time, recovery of the balance amount demanded under Ext.P2 shall be kept in abeyance. The contentions of both sides on the merits of the case are kept open. (P.N.Ravindran, Judge) tkv