IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN WEDNESDAY, THE 28TH OCTOBER 2009 / 6TH KARTHIKA 1931 WP(C).No. 30505 of 2009(G) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- PRINCIPAL, ST.XAVIER'S I.T.C., PULLUR, IRINJALAKUDA, TRICHUR. BY ADV. SRI.KURIAN GEORGE KANNANTHANAM, SENIOR ADVOCATE RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA REP.BY PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVT., POWER DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY, VYDYUTHI BHAVAN, PATTOM P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. SENIOR SUPERINTENDENT, KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, IRINJALAKUDA NO.2 ELECTRICAL SECTION, IRINJALAKUDA. GOVT. PLEADER SRI. K.C. SANTHOSH KUMAR. ADV. SRI. P.P. THAJUDEEN, S.C. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28/10/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S. Siri Jagan, J. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= W. P (C) No. 30505 of 2009 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Dated this, the 28th October, 2009. J U D G M E N T The petitioner is the Principal of a private educational institution. The institution has an electricity connection. The petitioner's grievance is that the Kerala State Electricity Board is charging for electricity consumption by the petitioner under LT VII-A tariff instead of LT VI-A tariff, which is the tariff applicable to private educational institutions. The petitioner would submit that a Division Bench of this Court has, in Bro. Joseph Antony v. Kerala State Electricity Board, 2009(3) KLT 1022, held that private educational institutions are liable to pay electricity charges only under LT VI-A tariff and not under LT VII-A tariff. The petitioner therefore challenges Ext. P1 bill demanding the difference between the charges under LT VII-A tariff and the charges paid by the petitioner under LT VI-A tariff. 2. The learned standing counsel for the Kerala State Electricity Board does not dispute the fact that the issue involved in this writ petition is covered by the abovesaid Division Bench decision. In the above circumstances, Ext. P1 bill is quashed and the respondents are directed to issue a fresh bill, if any, in respect of electricity charges payable by the petitioner under LT VI-A tariff. It is further declared that the petitioner is liable to pay electricity charges only under LT VI-A tariff. The writ petition is disposed of as above. Sd/- S. Siri Jagan, Judge. Tds/ [True copy] P.S to Judge.