IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN TUESDAY, THE 28TH SEPTEMBER 2010 / 6TH ASWINA 1932 Con.Case(C).No. 1151 of 2010(S) ------------------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.20434/2010 Dated 01/07/2010 .................... PETITIONER(S)/PETITIONER :- ------------------------------------------ M.A.VAHEEDA BABU, AGED 43 YEARS, W/O.BABU KARUKAPADATH, ACHANVEETTIL LANE, S.R.M.ROAD, PACHALAM P.O., KOCHI - 12. BY ADVS. SRI.JAGAN ABRAHAM M. GEORGE SRI.K.A.NOUSHAD SRI.P.G.PRAMOD SRI.KANDAMPULLY RAHUL RESPONDENT(S)/2ND RESPONDENT :- ---------------------------------------------------- C.O.ANITHA, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER, ASST.EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, KERALA WATER AUTHORITY, WATER WORKS SUB DIVISION, PALLIMUKKU, KOCHI - 16. STANDING COUNSEL MR.M.DINESH THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28/09/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: jvt S. SIRI JAGAN, J ----------------------- Contempt Case No.1151 of 2010 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 28th day of September 2010 J U D G M E N T Petitioner's grievance in this contempt case is that, without complying with the directions in Annexure-A judgment, Annexure-D bill has been issued which amounts to contempt of Court. The directions in my judgment are as follows :- “The 2nd respondent shall see that an accurate water meter is installed and that water meter records the actual consumption of water by the petitioner. The 2nd respondent shall take readings of the consumption of water from that meter for three months. Then, entire bills for the period from 2008 onwards shall be revised in accordance with the average consumption for the three months after the new meter is installed. Excess amounts shall be adjusted against the future bills of the petitioner. Till the above process is completed, the petitioner shall be allowed to pay by-monthly water charges of Rs.1000/-.” Contempt Case No.1151 of 2010 -: 2 :- The petitioner's contention is that the water meter has been changed only recently and without taking the actual consumption as directed, Annexure-D bill has been issued for an amount of Rs.17,037/-, which amounts to violation of the directions of the judgment. 2. A counter affidavit has been filed by the respondent, stating that, Annexure-D bill has been issued by mistake and that the same would not be enforced. This is recorded. 3. The submission of the Standing Counsel for the Water Authority that further bill will be issued only after the process as directed by this Court is completed is also recorded and the Contempt Case is closed. S. SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE Jvt