IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM THURSDAY, THE 9TH JUNE 2011 / 19TH JYAISHTA 1933 WP(C).No. 12168 of 2011(U) ---------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------- K.M.MUSTHAFA, AGED 60 YEARS, S/O.MOIDEEN KUNJU, KALEEKKAL HOUSE, MUTHOOR MURI, THIRUVALLA VILLAGE, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.R.SANTHOSH BABU RESPONDENT(S): -------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001. 2. DISTRICT COLLECTOR, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT - 689 645. 3. DEPUTY TAHSILDAR, REVENUE RECOVERY, TALUK OFFICE, THIRUVALLA - 689 101. 4. THE VILLAGE OFFICER, THIRUVALLA VILLAGE, THIRUVALLA - 689 101. 5. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, KERALA WATER AUTHORITY, P.H.DIVISION, THIRUVALLA - 689 101. R5 BY ADV. SRI.M.DINESH, SC., K.W.A. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09/06/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: svs C.K.ABDUL REHIM, J. ------------------------------------------- W.P.(C).No.12168 of 2011 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 9th day of June, 2011 J U D G M E N T ---------------------- The dispute pertains to liability for payment of water charges for which demand is made against the petitioner. According to the petitioner, the connection in question stood disconnected from 2003 onwards and hence the petitioner is not liable for payment of the amounts under demand. It is noticed that the petitioner had raised objections as evidenced from Ext.P3 and P4 against the demand now made. Since the revenue recovery steps were initiated without considering such objections this writ petition is filed. 2. It is noticed that by virtue of interim stay granted by this court on 12.4.2011, the petitioner had remitted a sum of Rs.10,000/-. 3. Heard; standing counsel appearing for 5th respondent. It is brought to my notice that any dispute with respect to the demand for payment of water charges can be raised before the Executive Engineer of the division concerned by virtue of the provisions contained in the Kerala Water Authority Water Supply Regulations. Since the petitioner had W.P.(C).12168/11 -2- already submitted Ext.P4 before the said authority, I am of the view that interest of justice will be served if the Executive Engineer (5th respondent) is directed to consider and dispose of the matter after affording a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. 4. Under the above circumstances, the writ petition is disposed of directing the 5th respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P4 representation filed by the petitioner after affording an opportunity of personal hearing, as early as possible, at any rate, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. 5. In view of the deposit already made the respondents are directed to refrain from proceeding with any further steps of recovery till the disposal of the matter by the 5th respondent as directed above. 6. Needless to say that appropriation of amount already deposited shall be made subject to outcome of the decision which will be taken by the 5th respondent. C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE. okb