IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC FRIDAY, THE 7TH AUGUST 2009 / 16TH SRAVANA 1931 WP(C).No. 22518 of 2009(H) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- ALANGADAN KUNHAVARU,S/O.ALASSANKUTTY HAJI, PARAPPUR AMSOM, POST PARAPPUR, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.C.M.MOHAMMED IQUABAL RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. 2. THE ASSISTANT ENGINEER, ELECTRICAL SECTION, K.S.E.BOARD, KOTTAKKAL. 3. THE SUB ENGINEER, ELECTRICAL SECTION, K.S.E.BOARD, KOTTAKKAL. 4. KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY REGULATORY COMMISSION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. SC FOR KSEB SRI. P.P. THAJUDEEN SC FOR KSERC SMT. SREEDEVI KYLASANATHAN GOVT. PLEADER SRI. K.S. MOHAMMED HASHIM THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07/08/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC,J. --------------------- W.P.(C).No.22518 OF 2009 ------------------------ Dated this the 7th day of August, 2009. JUDGMENT Challenge in this writ petition is against Exts.P7 and P8 orders. These are orders appealable under Section 127 of the Indian Electricity Act. Having regard to the availability of alternate remedy, I am not inclined to interfere with this writ petition. 2. Counsel for the petitioner complains that, it is in view of the condition in Section 127 of the Indian Electricity Act, requiring remittance of 50% of the amount due to maintain an appeal, that exorbitant amounts are levied by Exts.P7 and P8. The said allegation is totally unsubstantiated and therefore cannot be accepted. In view of the availability of alternate remedy available to the petitioner, the writ petition is dismissed. (ANTONY DOMINIC) JUDGE vi/