IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR THURSDAY, THE 19TH JUNE 2008 / 29TH JYAISHTA 1930 WP(C).No. 29646 of 2006(D) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ P.V.MATHAI PILLAI, S/O.VARKEY, AGED 82 YEARS, PADINJAREKUDIYIL VEEDU, RAJAKUMARI P.O., IDUKKI DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.N.RAGHURAJ RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, VAIDYUTHI BHAVAN, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. 2. THE ASSISTANT ENGINEER, ELECTRICAL SECTION, KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, CHITHIRAPURAM, IDUKKI DISTRICT. 3. THE ASSISTANT ENGINEER, KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, RAJAKUMARI, IDUKKI DISTRICT. 4. THE DEPUTY TAHSILDAR (RR), UDUMBANCHOLA, IDUKKI DISTRICT. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 19/06/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1: TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF ACKNOWLEDGEMENT CARD ACKNOWLEDGED BY THE SUB ENGINEER KSEB ON 2.1.2003. P2: TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF NOTICE DT.28.8.2006 ISSUED BY R4 TO THE PETITIONER U/S.7 OF THE RR ACT. P2(a): TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF NOTICE DT.28.8.2006 ISSUED BY R4 TO THE PETITIONER U/S.34 OF THE RR ACT. TRUE COPY PA TO JUDGE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. .................................................................... W.P.(C) No.29646 of 2006 .................................................................... Dated this the 19th day of June, 2008. JUDGMENT The petitioner is challenging recovery proceedings for recovery of arrears of electricity dues in respect of connection given to a lodging house let out by the petitioner. Petitioner being the consumer on record is liable to pay electricity dues irrespective of whether tenant paid the same to the petitioner or not. Even though statement is filed by the third respondent about disconnection and dismantling made, he has not given details of arrears demanded from the petitioner such as consumer number under which arrears are due, break-up details of current charges, fixed charges, if any, and interest demanded. Since an appeal is maintainable before the Executive Engineer against detailed demand, I do not propose to go into the correctness of the amount demanded. However, having regard to the amount involved, I direct the 4th respondent to withhold recovery proceedings for three months from now. Respondents 2 or 3, whoever is in charge of petitioner's area, is directed to give break up details of the amount outstanding from the petitioner with consumer number for the petitioner to file appeal before the next higher authority namely, Assistant Executive 2 Engineer or the Executive Engineer. Detailed statement should be given by the concerned respondent within two weeks from date of production of copy of this judgment by the petitioner. The petitioner is given further two weeks time to file appeal and if appeal is filed, there will be direction to the appellate authority to dispose of the same within one month thereafter. Recovery thereafter will be based on orders of the appellate authority and if no appellate orders are produced within three months from now, the amount covered by the Revenue Recovery notice will be recovered. C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR Judge pms