IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH FRIDAY, THE 27TH FEBRUARY 2009 / 8TH PHALGUNA 1930 WP(C).No. 2693 of 2009(U) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ---------------------- C.J.MATHEW, CHENGALATH HOUSE, PANAMKAYAM ESTATE, UPPADA POST, NILAMBUR. BY ADV. SRI.J.JULIAN XAVIER SRI.FIROZ K.ROBIN RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, VYDHYUTHI BHAVAN PATTOM,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. DEPUTY CHIEF ENGINEER,ELECTRICAL CIRCLE, K.S.E.B, MANJERI. 3. ASSISTANT ENGINEER,ELECTRICAL SECTION, CHUNGATHARA. BY STANDING COUNSEL SRI.P.P.THAJUDEEN. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 27/02/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.M.JOSEPH, J. ------------------------------------------------------ W.P.(C) No. 2693 of 2009-U ---------------------------------------------- Dated, this the 27th day of February, 2009 J U D G M E N T The prayers in the writ petition are as follows: “1). to call for the records connected with the case leading to Exts.P3, P5, P7, P8 and P9 and to quash the same by issuing a writ of certiorari. 2). to declare that petitioner has not violated the provisions of Electricity Act 2003 and KSEB Terms and Conditions of Supply in the light of Ext.P10 Tariff Notification issued by the Kerala State Electricity Regulatory Commission. 3). to order directing the respondents that not to levy penal charges under LT VIII tariff for the alleged unauthorised extension, billing at penal rates on the basis of the connected load on daily basis and set aside the penalty demands. 4) to direct the 2nd respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P6 keeping in abeyance WPC No. 2693/09 -2- Exts.P8 and P9 in the light of Ext.P10 Tariff Notification.” 2. It is true that the petitioner relies on the judgment of the learned Single Judge. But there is no dispute that, that matter is pending in W.A.No.607/2008. 3. In such circumstances, I feel that, the petitioner can pursue his remedy before the appellate forum. Without prejudice to the right of the petitioner to pursue the appellate remedy, the writ petition is disposed of. (K.M.JOSEPH) JUDGE. MS