IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KURIAN JOSEPH FRIDAY, THE 11TH JULY 2008 / 20TH ASHADHA 1930 WP(C).No. 21504 of 2005(I) ------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- M.C. JACOB, S/O. LATE CHACKO, AGED 72 YEARS, R/O. MEKKAMKKUNNEL HOUSE, VILANGU, KIZHAKKAMBALAM. BY ADV. SRI.K.P.DANDAPANI (SR.) RESPONDENTS: ---------------------- 1. KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, VYDHYUTHI BHAVAN, PATTOM, TRIVANDRUM-695 004. 2. DEPUTY CHIEF ENGINEER (APTS), ERNAKULAM, KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, POWER HOUSE ROAD, ALUVA-683 101. 3. THE ASSISTANT ENGINEER, ELECTRICAL SECTION, KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD KIZHAKKAMBALAM-683 562. ADV. SRI.JOSE J.MATHEIKEL, SC, KSEB FOR R1 TO 3 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 11/07/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C) NO. 21504/2005 APPENDIX PETITIONERS EXHIBITS EXT.P1:- COPY OF THE ORDER NO.APTS/DCE/BV-5963/2001/EKM DT. 20.6.05 ISSUED BY the 3RD RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER. EXT.P2:- COPY OF THE INVOICE NO.41386 DT. 1.7.05 FOR RS. 34,238/- ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER. /TRUE COPY/ P.S. TO JUDGE tss KURIAN JOSEPH, J. ----------------------------------------- W.P(C) No.21504 of 2005 ----------------------------------------- Dated this the 11th day of July, 2008 JUDGMENT The writ petition is filed mainly with the following prayers:- i) issue a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ or order or direction commanding the respondents to call for the records leading to the issuance of Ext.P1 and P2 and quash the same. ii) declare that the petitioner is not liable to be penalised under Regulation 42(d) of the conditions of the supply of electrical charges with regard to the energy charges. iii) issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or order or direction, to stay the operation of Ext.P2 invoice and all further recovery proceedings pursuant to Ext.P2 Invoice dated 02-07-2005. As far as penalty for unauthorised connected load is concerned, it is now settled law in view of the Bench decision of this Court in W.A.No.1231/2003 that the penalty has to be limited to the fixed charge portion. It is held that there shall not be any penalty by way of proportionate energy charges. The impugned demands are quashed making it clear that the liability of the petitioner shall only be for the penalty for fixed charge portion. The revised demand shall be issued to the petitioner and the amounts already remitted by the petitioner shall be adjusted. The writ petition is disposed of as above. (KURIAN JOSEPH, JUDGE) ahg. KURIAN JOSEPH, J. ----------------------------------- W.P(C).No.21504 of 2005 ----------------------------------- JUDGMENT 11th July, 2008