IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN TUESDAY, THE 4TH MARCH 2008 / 14TH PHALGUNA 1929 WP(C).No. 7562 of 2008(A) ------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------ M/S. HEVEA RUBBER TECHNOLOGIES PVT.LTD. 21, DEVELOPMENT PLOT, Y.M.A.ROAD POOVANTHURUTHU P.O., KOTTAYAM-686 012 REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR MR.KURIEN CHERIAN BY ADV. SRI.DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN SMT.T.G.SEETHAL RESPONDENTS: ---------------------- 1. THE KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY VYDYUTHI BHAVAN, PATTOM, TRIVANDRUM. 2. THE ASSISTANT ENGINEER, OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT ENGINEER, ELECTRICAL SECTION, KSEB NATTAKAM, MOOLAVATTOM, KOTTAYAM-686026. 3. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER ELECTRICAL DIVISION, PALLOM. R1 TO R3 BY SC SRI.P.P.THAJUDEEN. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04/03/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Thottathil B. Radhakrishnan, J. ================================== W.P.(C)No.7562 of 2008 ================================== Dated this the 4th day of March, 2008. JUDGMENT Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned standing counsel for the Electricity Board. 2. Petitioner, as noticed in Ext.P5 judgment, had availed two independent connections during two different years for two different purposes in two different buildings. The officials in the Board takes the stand that these electric connections have to be consolidated and the petitioner has to avail a high tension facility. He was relegated to be heard by the superior officer in the Board, who has now issued Ext.P7. I do not venture to state anything in the nature of the direction WPC7562/2008 -:2:- that is being issued hereunder. 3. The issue in hand may require resolution of disputed facts. But predominantly they are in the realm of technical details and application of necessary rules relating to classification of supply on the basis of supply point and all. Such disputes between the KSEB as the licensee and the petitioner as the consumer, can gain the attention before the Consumer Grievances Redressal Forum. In the aforesaid circumstances, this writ petition is disposed of directing that if the petitioner moves the appropriate CGRF within a period of three weeks from now, that authority will make an endeavour to finally decide the issue within an outer limit of three months WPC7562/2008 -:3:- after hearing necessary parties and in accordance with law. Until such a decision is taken, the insistance of the respondents that the petitioner shall avail high tension supply shall stand deferred. Thottathil B.Radhakrishnan, Judge. sl.