IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH FRIDAY, THE 2ND JANUARY 2009 / 12TH POUSHA 1930 WP(C).No. 170 of 2009(T) ------------------------------------------ PETITIONER(S): --------------------- DIRECTOR, CAMPION SCHOOL,EDAPPALLY, KOCHI-24. BY ADV. SRI.WILSON URMESE RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------ 1. KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,VYDHUTHI BHAVAN, PATTOM.P.O, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695004. 2. THE DEPUTY CHIEF ENGINEER, ELECTRICAL CIRCLE, KSEB, ERNAKULAM. 3. THE ASSISTANT ENGINEER, ELECTRICAL SECTION, KSEB, EDAPPALLY, KOCHI-24. by SRI.P.P.THAJUDEEN, SC, KSEB THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02/01/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K. M. JOSEPH, J. -------------------------------------- W.P.C. NO. 170 OF 2009 T -------------------------------------- Dated this the 2nd January, 2009 JUDGMENT I heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned standing counsel appearing for the respondent Electricity Board. Petitioner challenges Exts.P2, P3 and P3(a). Ext.P2 is a mahazar prepared. Ext.P3 is a notice and Ext.P3(a) is an Invoice. Ext.P3(a) is stated to be a provisional Invoice. Petitioner has already preferred Ext.P4 objection. I feel that being a provisional demand under Section 126 of the Act, the objections filed by the petitioner must be looked into. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing the third respondent to consider and take a decision on Ext.P4 objection filed by the petitioner in accordance with law, after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this Judgment. Till such time, there will be no disconnection pursuant to Ext.P3(a). Sd/= K. M. JOSEPH, JUDGE kbk. // True Copy // PS to Judge