IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON WEDNESDAY, THE 30TH JUNE 2010 / 9TH ASHADHA 1932 WP(C).No. 20307 of 2010(K) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- P.G.SURESH, AGED 52 S/O.GANGADHARAN PACKLINE CARTONS INDIA PRIVATE LTD, KARUMANAM KADU, GOVINDAPURAM, MUTHALAMADA, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.K.RAMACHANDRAN SRI.S.SREEDEV RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD , SECRETARIAT,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 2. THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER ELECTRICAL SECTION, MUTHALAMADA, PALAKKAD. 3. DEPUTY CHIEF ENGINEER, ELECTRICAL DIVISION PALAKKAD. BY SRI.P.P.THAJUDEEN - SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 30/06/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, J --------------------------- W.P(C) No.20307 of 2010-K ---------------------------- Dated this the 30th day of June, 2010. J U D G M E N T The petitioner has approached this Court seeking for the following reliefs: “A) Call for the records leading up to Exhibits P1 to P4. B) Issue a Writ of Certiorari or other appropriate Writ, order or direction quashing Ext.P1 and P2 issued by the second respondent dated 26.5.2010; C) Issue a writ of Mandamus or other appropriate writ or direction directing the second respondent to hear and dispose off Exhibit P3 dated 8.6.2010 and also direct the third respondent to hear and dispose off Exhibit P4 representation dated 28.6.2010 and till then not to disconnect the supply of electrical energy to the petitioner's consumer No.5050 Lt IV of Electrical Section, Muthalamada. D) Render such other orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, eventhough the petitioner has preferred Ext.P4 representation, it is now revealed to the petitioner that the same is missing. The petitioner is constrained to approach this Court because of the coercive steps taken in the meanwhile for effecting disconnection. W.P(C) No.20307 of 2010-K 2 3. Heard the learned standing counsel appearing for the respondent Board as well. 4. Taking note of the fact that Ext.P4 dated 28.6.2010, the petitioner is permitted to prefer a fresh appeal, satisfying the requirements as specified in accordance with law, within one week from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The third respondent is directed to consider such appeal and pass final orders after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. It is made clear that, the coercive proceedings shall be kept in abeyance till such time, on condition that the petitioner satisfies 50% of the liability as prescribed, under the relevant provisions of the statute. The Writ Petition is disposed of. P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON JUDGE ab