IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC THURSDAY, THE 11TH JUNE 2009 / 21ST JYAISHTA 1931 WP(C).No. 16132 of 2009(J) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------ MANKO NATURAL FLAVOURS AND EXTRACTS (PVT.LTD.), KINFRA INDUSTRIAL PARK, KORATTY, THRISSUR-680 308, REP. BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, SRI.K.O.ITTOOP. BY ADV. SRI.K.I.ABDUL RASHEED SRI.K.A.SHAMSUDEEN RESPONDENT(S): ------------------- 1. THE KERALA STATE ELECTRICTIY BOARD REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, VYDYUTHI BHAVAN, PATTAM P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE ASST. EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, ELECTRICAL SUB DIVISION, KORATTY, THRISSUR DISTRICT. 3. THE ASST.ENGINEER, ELECTRICAL MAJOR SECTION, KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, KORATTY, THRISSUR DISTRICT. SRI.P.P.THAJUDEEN, SC, KSEB THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11/06/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ================ W.P.(C) NO. 16132 OF 2009 (J) ===================== Dated this the 11th day of June, 2009 J U D G M E N T Petitioner submits that it is an SSI unit availing of supply of power from the respondents. According to the petitioner, there was an inspection in its unit and Ext.P3 is the mahazar, in which it is stated that there was excess connected load. It is stated that without further notice or other proceedings, the respondents have issued Ext.P4, a final bill demanding an amount of Rs.2,18,210/-. Petitioner submits that the findings in Ext.P3 mahazar and the liability that is quantified in Ext.P4 are erroneous. It is on that basis, the writ petition is filed seeking to challenge the bill. 2. Standing counsel rightly points out that if the petitioner has any grievance, it is open to them to file objections, in which case, it is for the 3rd respondent to consider the same. 3. Taking note of the submissions thus made, I dispose of this writ petition with the following directions. (1) That within 2 weeks from today, it will be open to the petitioner to file their objections against Ext.P4. (2) If objections are so filed by the petitioner, treating WPC 16132/09 :2 : Ext.P4 as a provisional bill, the 3rd respondent shall consider the objections with notice to the petitioner and pass orders thereon. Counsel for the petitioner prays that until orders are passed, coercive action shall not be initiated. Having regard to the fact that Ext.P4 is directed to be a provisional demand, I do not find any reason for such apprehension. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp