IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH FRIDAY, THE 20TH JUNE 2008 / 30TH JYAISHTA 1930 WP(C).No. 16267 of 2008(J) ---------------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ----------------- BHARATH SANCHAR NIGAM LIMITED, REPRESENTED BY THE DIVISIONAL ENGINEER, TELECOM, VENJARAMOODU. BY ADV. SRI.C.S.RAMANATHAN RESPONDENTS: ----------------------- 1. DEPUTY CHIEF ENGINEER, ELECTRICAL CIRCLE (URBAN), POWER HOUSE BUILDING, TRIVANDRUM. 2. EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, MAJOR SECTION, KSEB, KAZHAKUTTOM, TRIVANDRUM. 3. ASSISTANT ENGINEER (ELECTRICAL MAJOR SECTION), NALANCHIRA, TRIVNDRUM. 4. ASSISTANT ENGINEER, ANTI POWER THEFT SQUAD, KSEB, TRIVANDRUM. BY SHRI P.P. THAJUDEEN, SC, KSEB. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20/06/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K. M. JOSEPH, J. -------------------------------------- W.P.C. NO. 16267 OF 2008 J -------------------------------------- Dated this the 20th June, 2008 JUDGMENT Petitioner challenges Exts.P1 and P3 and seeks a direction to pass orders on the Appeal without insisting on any payment. Petitioner had approached this Court earlier and this Court had directed the petitioner to prefer an Appeal under Section 127 against the Bill so finalised by the Assistant Engineer. It was also directed that if such Appeal is filed, the Deputy Chief Engineer will call for the subsequent bills after replacement of the meter and verify the genuineness of the allegation and pass appropriate orders. The Deputy Chief Engineer was directed to pass interim orders regarding the amount payable by the petitioner under the disputed bill for maintainability of the Appeal and for stay within two weeks from the date of filing the Appeal. The Deputy Engineer was given freedom to fix the amount payable by the petitioner. There was a further direction not to insist on payment of more than fifty per cent as a WPC. 16267/08 J 2 condition for maintainability of Appeal and in other words, it was for him to fix the amount payable after examining the correctness of the matter, prima facie. Thereafter, Ext.P3 order is passed. By Ext.P3, the Deputy Chief Engineer has directed payment of fifty per cent of then re-assessed amount of Rs.5,55,921/= within seven days. 2. I heard the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner. According to him, the Deputy Chief Engineer has not considered the matter as directed by this Court. In fact, it is pointed out that the amount fixed in Ext.P1 itself comes only Rs.5,03,046/=. But now, the amount demanded is Rs.5,55,921/=. According to him, if the direction given in Ext.P2 Judgment has been properly complied with, the amount would not have been as determined by the Deputy Chief Engineer. Learned standing counsel for the respondent Electricity Board on instructions submits that the Deputy Chief Engineer has looked into the matter and fixed the amount. 3. I notice that the amount demanded in Ext.P1 is only WPC. 16267/08 J 3 Rs.5,03,046/=. The amount demanded from the petitioner in Ext.P3 is Rs.5,55,921/=. For maintaining an Appeal under Section 127, the law requires under Sub-section 2 of Section 127, the deposit of fifty per cent of the amount assessed which is statutorily required and which the learned Single Judge had not actually waived in the matter. Having regard to all facts, I feel that Ext.P3 can be modified and if the petitioner remits fifty per cent of Rs.5,03,046/= within two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this Judgment, the Appeal will be entertained and decided in accordance with law. The Writ Petition is disposed of as above. K. M. JOSEPH, JUDGE kbk.