IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH & THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M.C.HARI RANI TUESDAY, THE 5TH OCTOBER 2010 / 13TH ASWINA 1932 WA.No. 34 of 2008 ------------------------- (Against the Judgment in (OP.No.14395 of 2003 dated 22.11.2006) APPELLANT(S): RESPONDENTS: --------------------------------------------- 1. KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, VYDYUTHI BHAVANAM, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. DEPUTY CHIEF ENGINEER (APTS), ANTI POWER THEFT SQUAD (HQ), VYDYUTHI BHAVAN, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. ASSISTANT ENGINEER, ELECTRICAL SECTION (TOWN), ALAPPUZHA. BY STANDING COUNSEL SRI.C.K.KARUNAKARAN RESPONDENT(S): PETITIONER: ------------------------------------------- SMT. J.SARADAMMA, W/O. LATE RAMAKRISHNA PANICKER, AGED 71 YEARS, OWNER VIJAYA COMPLEX, JETTY ROAD, ALAPPUZHA. BY ADV. SRI.K.S.HARIHARAPUTHRAN SRI.GEOROGE MATHEW. THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ORDERS ON 05/10/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.M.JOSEPH & M.C.HARI RANI, JJ. ------------------------------------------------------ W.A.No.34 of 2008 ---------------------------------------------- Dated, this the 5th day of October, 2010 J U D G M E N T K.M.Joseph, J. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the appellants that the appellants have filed appeal against the judgment of the learned Single Judge wherein the learned Single Judge observed that there shall be no penalty for proportionate energy charges and the penalty shall be limited only to the fixed charges. 2. The learned counsel for the appellants would submit that the matter is covered by the Division Bench decision of this Court in W.A.Nos.1579 of 2008 and connected cases. We follow the same and dispose of the appeal as follows: The writ appeal is allowed to the extent of modifying the directions contained in the impugned judgment. The Secretary of the Kerala State Electricity Board is directed to reconsider the impugned bills imposing penalty issued in the WA No.34 of 2008 -2- case and shall take a decision in the case with respect to the quantum of penalty to be imposed, taking note of the observations made in the judgment in W.A.No.1553 of 2009. Such decision shall be taken after affording an opportunity of hearing to the consumers concerned. It is made clear that the petitioner in the writ petition will be at liberty to raise all contentions with respect to correctness of the imposition of penalty including the challenge against the quantum before the Secretary. Decision as directed above shall be taken at the earliest possible, at any rate within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. (K.M.JOSEPH) JUDGE. (M.C.HARI RANI) JUDGE. MS