IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH FRIDAY, THE 22ND AUGUST 2008 / 31ST SRAVANA 1930 RP.No. 905 of 2008(D) --------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN WPC.17462/2008 Dated 16/06/2008 .................... REVIEW PETITIONERS/RESPONDENTS: ------------------------------------------------------ 1. KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE APPELLATE AUTHORITY (DEPUTY CHIEF ENGINEER), APTS HEAD QUARTERS, VAIDHYUTHI BHAVAN, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE SENIOR SUPERINTENDENT, PATHANAMTHITTA ELECTRICAL DIVISION, PATHANAMTHITTA. 4. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, PATHANAMTHITTA ELECTRICAL DIVISION, PATHANAMTHITTA. 5. THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, ELECTRICAL DIVISION, VADASSERIKKARA, PATHANAMTHITTA. 6. K.SURESH, ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, ANTI POWER THEFT SQUAD, POOVANTHURUTH P.O., KOTTAYAM-12. BY ADV. SRI.P.P.THAJUDEEN, SC, K.S.E.B RESPONDENTS/PETITIONER : ---------------------------------------- K.J.THOMASKUTTY, S/O.JOSEPH, KANNAMTHANATHU HOUSE, KUMARAMPEROOR VADAKKARA MURI VADASSERIKKARA, PATHANAMTHITTA. BY SRI. LIJU V. STEPHEN. THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22/08/2008,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.M.JOSEPH, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - R.P. No.905 of 2008 & WP.(C) No.17462 of 2008 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 22nd day of August, 2008 ORDER I heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the parties. 2. By the judgment under review, this court had, accepting the case of the petitioners in the review petition, permitted the issuance of the provisional bill by the fifth respondent in the writ petition, who is the fifth petitioner in the review petition. The statutory authority under Section 126 of the Electricity Act to issue the provisional bill and finalise the same is the Assistant Engineer. This review petition is filed on the said basis. 3. I find that the competent person to issue the bill under the Act can be only the Assistant Engineer. In such circumstances, the review petition is allowed and the direction in the writ petition will be treated as a direction to the Assistant Engineer of the concerned section to issue the provisional bill instead of the fifth respondent. The review petition and the writ petitions are disposed of in the said fashion. (K.M. JOSEPH, JUDGE) sb