IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON WEDNESDAY, THE 12TH AUGUST 2009 / 21ST SRAVANA 1931 WP(C).No. 20419 of 2009(V) -------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- THE HILL VALLEY HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL, CHANGAPUZHA NAGAR P.O., THRIKKAKA, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL MS.LILLY KURIAN. BY ADV. MR. DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN MR. K.M.ANEESH RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, K.S.E.B., WATER SUPPLY SUB DIVISION, ALUVA. 2. THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, WATER SUPPLY SUB DIVISION, KALAMASSERY. 3. THE TAHSILDAR, KANAYANNUR TALUK, KOCHI-682 011. R2 BY ADV. SRI.M.DINESH, SC, KWA THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12/08/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON J. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ W.P. (C) No. 20419 of 2009 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dated, this the 12th day of August, 2009 JUDGMENT The issue involved in the Writ Petition is as to the sustainability of demand for water charges stated as used by the petitioner school established in the year 1982 and functioning as a non-profit making organization. The definite case of the petitioner is that, no water was available, though a consumer connection was provided with consumer No. KLT 1234/N. Because of scarcity of the water from 1994 - '95, the petitioner school was constrained to dig a well and find out other appropriate alternate arrangements to meet the water requirements for the students as well as the staff. However, without any regard to the fact that no water was being supplied/distributed, the Water Authority demanded exorbitant amounts as due, vide Ext.P2, followed by further correspondence in between. Finally, asserting that, no amount was liable to be paid by the petitioner, Ext.P7 representation was filed, to have the matter referred to 'adalath'. 2. Pursuant to Ext.P7, the adalath was held, which led to Ext.P11 minutes, wherein the petitioner is stated as agreed to have the matter settled by remitting a sum of Rs. 85,962/- under 'OTS', which was to be WP (C) No. 20419 of 2009 : 2 : remitted on or before the 15th of April, 2007 showing the calculation upto 28.2.2007. Referring to the said proceedings, Ext.P8 communication was issued from the office of the Assistant Executive Engineer, asking the petitioner to clear the said amount. On receipt of Ext.P8, the petitioners submitted Ext.P9 reply stating that, there was no such agreement to have the matter settled, as pointed out from the part of the water authority. Taking note of the sequence of events, the position was explained in crystal-clear terms by the water authority, as borne by Ext.P10 reply, pointing out that since the petitioner did not choose to keep her word, the entire liability as on 30.04.2007 coming to a tune of Rs.1,75,948/- was liable to be satisfied on or before 15.6.2007, lest the adverse consequence by way of Kerala Revenue Recovery Act should be pursued by the Water Authority. 3. Met with the above circumstances, the petitioner preferred Ext.P12 statutory appeal before the Executive Engineer of Water Authority challenging the course and events and also the liability mulcted upon the petitioner. The case of the petitioner is that, Ext.P12 is kept in a cold storage and the water authority is only eager to proceed with the coercive steps pursuant to Exts.P13 and P14, which is sought to be intercepted in the present Writ Petition. WP (C) No. 20419 of 2009 : 3 : 4. The learned counsel for the respondents, referring to the additional counter affidavit filed, submits that, the course adopted by the petitioner taking a 'U' turn by Ext.P11 is liable to be deprecated in the strongest possible words. It is also pointed out that, the Executive Engineer has not received any material, produced as Ext.P2 appeal and hence no blame can be put on the said respondent for not considering the said appeal. 5. Considering the facts and circumstances, the first respondent/appellate authority is directed to treat the copy of Ext.P12 produced along with the Writ Petition as the statutory appeal preferred by the petitioner and to pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, as expeditiously as possible, subject to the condition that the petitioner deposits a sum of Rs. 85,962/- as shown in Ext.P11 within one month. 6. It is made clear that, the remittance of the said amount is only provisional and subject to the orders to be passed by the first respondent on merits. It is further made clear that, the final orders shall be passed by respondent on Ext.P12 appeal as expeditiously as possible, at any rate within 3 months from the date of remittance of the amount covered by Ext.P11 by the petitioner. Subject to the above, all WP (C) No. 20419 of 2009 : 4 : further coercive proceedings, pursuant to Exts.P13 and P14, shall be kept in abeyance, for the time being. The Writ Petition is disposed of accordingly. P. R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE kmd