IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN WEDNESDAY, THE 14TH OCTOBER 2009 / 22ND ASWINA 1931 WP(C).No. 28624 of 2009(W) ----------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------- K.R. KABEERDAS, S/O. LATE RAMAN, DOOR NO. 57/804, MAHAKAVI G. ROAD, KOCHI-11. BY ADV. MR.M.V.LALU MATHEWS RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- KERALA STATE WATER AUTHORITY, SUBDIVISION, KOCHI-16, REPRESENTED BY EXECUTIVE ENGINEER. BY ADV. MR. M.DINESH, SC, KSWA THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14/10/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss P.N.RAVINDRAN, J ........................................... WP(C).NO. 28624 OF 2009 ............................................ DATED THIS THE 14TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2009 JUDGMENT The main prayer in this writ petition is as follows:- “to issue a writ of Certiorari or other appropriate writ, order or direction to the respondents to reinstall the water connection”. The other relief sought is : “ to issue a Writ of Mandamus or other appropriate Writ, Order or direction to the respondents to allow the petitioner to remit the due amount in instalment basis”. 2. The petitioner contends, relying on Ext.P2 that though the Water Authority had waived a portion of the water charges payable and agreed to receive the sum of Rs.12,788/-, in the event of payment being made before 15.3.2009 towards water charges payable upto December 2008, he could not remit the amount before the due date viz, 15.3.2009. He submits that he Wpc 28624/2009 2 may be granted an opportunity to pay the amount fixed in Ext.P2, in instalments. 3. The petitioner is not the owner of the premises where he was running the business. The landlord was Smt.V.T.Remadevi. The consumer named in Ext.P2 is M.K.Narayana Menon. The petitioner has not pleaded or proved that he is the person in possession of the premises to which Ext.P2 relates. Further, he has also not shown that he is in continued possession of the tenanted premises. Further, the main prayer in this writ petition is to issue a writ of Certiorari directing the respondents to reinstall the water connection. Such a relief cannot be granted. The second prayer is to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to allow the petitioner to remit the due amount in instalments. From the prayer, it is not clear whether it relates to Ext.P2. The petitioner has not proved that he is the consumer named in Ext.P2. Therefore, the reliefs prayed for by the petitioner cannot be granted. The writ petition fails, and is accordingly dismissed. P.N.RAVINDRAN, JUDGE lgk