IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR FRIDAY, THE 29TH OCTOBER 2010 / 7TH KARTHIKA 1932 WP(C).No. 31273 of 2010(H) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ---------------------- M.P.KUNHAHAMMEDKUTTY, S/O.MUHAMMED KUNHI, AGED 47 YEARS, SUNEERA MANZIL, AREACODE, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.BABU S. NAIR RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------ 1. KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, VYDHUDHI BHAVAN, TRIVANDRUM,-1 2. THE DEPUTY CHIEF ENGINEER, K.S.E.B, MANJERI CIRCLE, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN- 676121 3. THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, ELECTRICAL MAJOR SECTION, NILAMBUR, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN- 6765041 4. THE ASSISTANT ENGINEER, ELECTRICAL SECTION, K.S.E.B, EDAVANNA, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, 676505. R1 TO R4 BY ADV. SRI.P.P.THAJUDEEN, SC, K.S.E.B THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29/10/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: sts C.T. RAVIKUMAR, J. -------------------------------------------- W.P.(C). NO.31273 OF 2010 -------------------------------------------- Dated this the 29th day of October, 2010 JUDGMENT The petitioner, who is the proprietor of a movie theatre namely 'Sangam Movies' at Edavanna in Malappuram District filed this Writ Petition challenging Ext.P9. After serving Ext.P9 on him, the electric supply to the petitioner's premises with consumer No.6548000438 was disconnected on 19.8.2010. In view of the order I propose to pass in this Writ Petition I do not think it necessary to narrate the facts any further or to deal with the rival contentions. Evidently, the petitioner has grievances with respect to Ext.P9 bill. As it was issued based on final assessment, the remedy of the petitioner is to prefer an appeal under Section 127 of the Electricity Act, 2003. Therefore, it will be open to the petitioner to prefer an appeal in terms of the said provision. In case the petitioner prefers an appeal within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, the authority concerned shall treat it as an appeal preferred within the statutory period and pass orders, in accordance with law. The learned Standing Counsel submitted that as on 29.10.2010, the amount W.P.(C) NO.31273/2010 2 outstanding was Rs.52,967/-. As already noticed hereinbefore, the electricity connection to the petitioner's premises was disconnected as early as on 19.8.2010. In the said circumstances, it is further ordered that in case the petitioner pays an amount of Rs.25,000/- together with re- connection charges, the respondents shall restore the electric connection within two days from the date of receipt of the said amount. It is further made clear that the amount deposited by the petitioner in terms of the directions in this judgment will be subject to the outcome of the said appeal. In case the petitioner succeeds in the said appeal, the amount remitted by the petitioner in terms of the directions in this judgment shall either be refunded or adjusted in further bills. The learned Standing Counsel submitted that in fact, the respondents have a case that the petitioner has been using unauthorised additional loads. If it is ultimately found that the petitioner is using the unauthorised additional loads, it will be open to the respondents to take action, in accordance with law. This Writ Petition is disposed of as above. (C.T. RAVIKUMAR, JUDGE) spc W.P.(C) NO.31273/2010 3 C.T. RAVIKUMAR, J. JUDGMENT W.P.(C) NO.31273/2010 4 September, 2010