IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON THURSDAY, THE 4TH MARCH 2010 / 13TH PHALGUNA 1931 WP(C).No. 7007 of 2010(A) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- RAJESH T.P.,AGED 44 YEARS., S/O.PUSHKARAN, TRUST TOWER,SOHODARAN AYYANPPAN ROAD,ERNAKULAM. BY ADV. SRI.PEEYUS A.KOTTAM RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, REPRESENTED BY DEPUTY CHIEF ENGINEER, POWERHOUSE ROAD, AYYAPPANKAVU, COCHIN-682018. 2. ASSISTANT ENGINEER, ELECTRICAL SECTION,KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, COLLEGE ROAD, ERNAKULAM, COCHIN - 682011. ADV. SRI.P.P.THAJUDEEN, SC, K.S.E.B THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04/03/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J. ----------------------------------------------- WP(C) No. 7007 of 2010 ------------------------------------- Dated, this the 4th day of March, 2010 J U D G M E N T The petitioner is aggrieved of Ext.P4 final bill issued by the respondents stating that the petitioner could not get effective opportunity to submit his objection in response to Ext.P1 provisional bill and hence that the matter is liable to be reconsidered. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the premises in question have been let out to a Chartered Accountant's firm and that Ext.P1 provisional bill was served to somebody in the premises and since the petitioner was not in station, he could not come across Ext.P1 bill on time, to have submitted his statement of objections within the prescribed time. It was in the said circumstance, that the respondents proceeded with further steps and issued Ext.P4 final bill. Immediately on receipt of the same, the petitioner preferred Ext.P3 statement of objections, projecting his grievance and the only prayer herein is to direct the concerned respondent to consider Ext.P3 objection and to pass fresh orders. 3. The learned standing counsel appearing for the respondents submits that there is absolutely no lapse or failure on the WP(C) No.7007/2010 2 part of the respondents with regard to the finalisation of the proceedings. By virtue of the clear mandate under Section 126(4) on serving Ext.P1 provisional bill, the petitioner has to meet the requirements as specified in the said provision within the stipulated time of 'seven' days and the fact that no statement or objection whatsoever was filed from the part of the petitioner before finalisation of Ext.P4 bill stands rather admitted. Obviously, Ext.P3 objection comes only after issuance of Ext.P4 bill and this being the position, the remedy available to the petitioner is to challenge the same by way of statutory remedy under Sub Section 2 of Section 127. It is also brought to the notice of this Court that the service of notice, which stands rather admitted (though not directly to the petitioner) is very much in tune with the relevant provisions of law. More so, when there is no case for the petitioner that Ext.P4 has been finalised without issuing any notice and the only grievance is that the petitioner could not respond as he was away from the station. 4. Considering the rival submissions, this Court finds that the remedy of the petitioner is to file appeal under Section 127 (2). However, taking note of the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the respondents are proceeding with coercive steps to cause disconnection of the supply, this Court finds that some breathing time could be given to the petitioner to pursue the statutory remedy. In the WP(C) No.7007/2010 3 said circumstance, the petitioner is directed to deposit 50% of the amount due under Ext.P4 [which is the statutory requirement for entertaining the appeal as contemplated under Section 127 (2)] by way of two equal monthly instalments, the first of which shall be effected within one week and the next one within three weeks thereafter. Subject to the satisfaction of the condition as above, the steps to disconnect the power supply shall be kept in abeyance for the time being. The Writ Petition is disposed of accordingly. P. R. RAMACHANDRA MENON JUDGE dnc