IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH THURSDAY, THE 29TH JANUARY 2009 / 9TH MAGHA 1930 WP(C).No. 2976 of 2009(D) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ---------------------- MUHAMMED BASHEER K.H., S/O.HAMZA K., AGED 37, PROPRIETOR, BSOFT, AZAD PLAZA, PERUMBOTTA ROAD, ELAMAKKARA, KOCHI - 682 026, KANAYANNUR TALUK, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.K.C.ELDHO RESPONDENT(S): ----------------------- 1. KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, VAIDHYUTHI BHAVAN, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, KSEB, ELECTRICAL MAJOR SECTION, EDAPPALLY. 3. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, KSEB, ELECTRICAL CIRCLE, ERNAKULAM. BY SC SRI. P.P. THAJUDEEN. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29/01/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.M.JOSEPH, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - WP.(C) No. 2976 of 2009 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 29th day of January, 2009 JUDGMENT Petitioner challenges Ext.P3 and seeks to accept the regular monthly bill covered by Ext.P6. He also seeks a direction to take a decision on Ext.P7 application. The further prayer is for a direction to consider Ext.P4 objection and pass final assessment bill. 2. Case of the petitioner is that there was an inspection. Ext.P1 is the report. Ext.P2 is the mahazar. Ext.P3 is the provisional assessment bill. Petitioner submitted Ext.P4 objection, it is stated. It is stated that it has not become final. It is also stated that the petitioner was directed to request for instalment, so that necessary waiving and correction can be made on Ext.P3 provisional assessment bill. Petitioner is served with Ext.P5 and he apprehends disconnection. Ext.P6 is the regular monthly bill. Petitioner submitted Ext.P7 application for regularisation of the connected load. 3. I heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel. WPC.2976/2009. 2 4. After the filing of the writ petition, disconnection has been made. Even though learned counsel for the petitioner points out that there is no final order passed, learned Standing Counsel on instructions submits that there was a hearing on the objection on 19.11.2008 and the final order was passed on 21.11.2008 and the petitioner made an application for instalment on 23.12.2008. Petitioner did not pay any amount. There is no dispute about that fact. In the circumstances, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner may be given instalment facility to pay the amount. Having considered the facts, the writ petition is disposed of as follows: Petitioner is permitted to pay off the entire amount remaining to be paid in four monthly instalments with due interest. Upon payment of Rs.45,000/- as first instalment, the connection will be restored to the petitioner. Upon restoration of the connection as aforesaid the concerned Assistant Executive Engineer will issue a statement showing the exact amount remaining to be paid and the amount of instalment to be paid. The first instalment will be payable on or before 25.2.2009 and the further instalments on or before the 25th of the succeeding months. It is needless to say that if the petitioner has not remitted any single instalment, it is open to WPC.2976/2009. 3 the respondents to disconnect the power supply. It is also directed that action in accordance with law will be taken on Ext.P7 as early as possible. (K.M. JOSEPH, JUDGE) sb