IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.BASHEER & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH MONDAY, THE 2ND FEBRUARY 2009 / 13TH MAGHA 1930 RP.No. 32 of 2009(S) -------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN COC.1181/2008 .................... REVIEW PETITIONER: ---------------------- M/S.KCT STEEL (PVT) LTD. (FORMERLY AGNI REROLLERS(P) LTD., HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICDE AT 246/12/17-B, DHARANI NAGAR WEST, GANAPATHY, PUDUR, 8TH STREET GANAPATHY, COIMBATORE-641008, REP. BY ITS PRESENT MANAGING DIRECTOR,.M.JAYA SARAVANA BALAJI. BY ADV. SRI.K.JAYAKUMAR SRI.P.B.KRISHNAN RESPONDENT: --------------- VENUGOPAL (FATHER'S NAME AND AGE NOT KNOWN TO PETITIONER) DEPUTY CHIEF ENGINEER, KSEB, ELECTRICAL CIRCLE, PALAKKAD. SRI. ASHOK M. CHERIAN THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02/02/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: A.K.BASHEER & THOMAS P. JOSEPH, JJ. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - R.P.No.32 OF 2009 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 2nd day of February, 2009 O R D E R Basheer, J: Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned standing counsel for the Kerala State Electricity Board. 2. Grievance of the petitioner is that the Board has made an unreasonable and exorbitant demand from it towards charges for reconnection of High Tension service connection, which was dismantled earlier. A perusal of Annexure-E will show that the Board has directed the petitioner to deposit an aggregate sum of Rs.17,96,784/= towards dismantling charges and reconnection charges both on the distribution as well as transmission side. The Board, in its counter affidavit, has denied the allegation that the demand made under Annexure-E is illegal or excessive. 3. Anyhow, we do not propose to go into that area of controversy at this stage, since learned counsel submits that petitioner intends to agitate the said issue in the writ petition pending before the learned Single Judge. 4. Keeping in view the above submission made by the petitioner at the bar and having regard to the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, we are satisfied that petitioner can be given liberty to impugn Annexure-E demand 2 RP.NO.32/09 before the learned Single Judge. Ordered accordingly. 5. However, the immediate problem that is being faced by the petitioner is the delay that is likely to be caused in getting reconnection. The Deputy Chief Engineer, who is present in court, has taken us through Annexure R1 and R2 estimates both on the transmission and distribution side. Yet again we do not propose to make any comment on the sustainability or otherwise of the said estimate for the reasons stated above. Undoubtedly, any delay in getting reconnection of electrical supply to the unit of the petitioner will be detrimental to the interests of all concerned. Petitioner points out that he has already availed of huge loans from various financial institutions. 6. Keeping in view all the relevant inputs, we are satisfied that the following directions can be issued as agreed by the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel, without prejudice to all the contentions that may be available to both sides in the writ petition: a. Petitioner shall remit a sum of Rs.17,96,784/= to the Board within an outer limit of three weeks from today without prejudice to the right of the petitioner to challenge the validity and correctness of Annexure E demand and Exts.R1 and R2 estimates made by the Board, before the learned Single Judge. b. On such deposit being made by the petitioner, the Board shall ensure that re-installation and reconnection are effected and electric supply is restored to the petitioner 3 RP.NO.32/09 within a period of two months from the date of deposit of the amount referred to above. c. In modification of the direction issued by this Court as regards deposit of the balance amount of Rs.50 lakhs in clause 5 of Annexure-A judgment dated December 01, 2008 in Con.Case (c).No. 1181/2008, petitioner shall remit only Rs.35 lakhs in lieu of Rs.50 lakhs within two months from the date of re-installation and reconnection of the electric supply. The review petition is closed in the above terms. (A.K.BASHEER, JUDGE) (THOMAS P. JOSEPH, JUDGE) cl 4 RP.NO.32/09