IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN WEDNESDAY, THE 16TH FEBRUARY 2011 / 27TH MAGHA 1932 WP(C).No. 4534 of 2011(N) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- P.P.UMMAR HAJI, S/O.IBRAHIM, SHUHAIBAS, NARATH P.O., KANNUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.SUNIL V.MOHAMMED SRI.P.M.MOHAMMED HASSAN SRI.V.PRASANTH RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE ASSISTANT ENGINEER, ELECTRICAL SECTION, KANNUR-670002. 2. THE DEPUTY CHIEF ENGINEER, ELECTRICAL CIRCLES, SOUTH BAZAR, KANNUR-670002. BY ADV. SRI. P.P.THAJUDEEN S.C KSEB. BY GOVT. PLEADER SMT.R.BINDU. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16/02/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.N. RAVINDRAN, J. ------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.4534 of 2011 ------------------------------- Dated this the 16th day of February, 2011 J U D G M E N T The petitioner is a consumer of electrical energy. The first respondent inspected the premises of the petitioner on 2.6.2010. He then noticed that the petitioner had taken unauthorised extension of the electricity supply. Exts.P4 to P6 notices accompanied by provisional demands were thereupon served on the petitioner calling upon him to remove the additional load or to regularise it and to pay the energy charges demanded. In this writ petition, the petitioner challenges Ext.P4 to P6 notices. He also seeks a direction to the second respondent to consider Exts.P10 to P12 objections filed by him. 2. When the writ petition came up for hearing today, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that pursuant to the inspection, only a provisional assessment was made, that the petitioner thereupon submitted a written objection, that he was heard on 14.2.2011 and that final orders are yet to be passed by the first respondent. The learned counsel further submitted that in such circumstances, the writ petition may be disposed of with a direction to the first respondent to pass final orders in the matter after considering W.P.(C) No.4534 of 2011 2 the objections submitted by him at the hearing held on 14.2.2011. Per contra, the learned standing counsel for the Kerala State Electricity Board submitted that the second respondent will consider Exts.P10 to P12 appeal, if the petitioner deposits 50% of the amount demanded in the disputed notices. 3. It is evident from the materials presently on record that the first respondent is yet to pass final orders pursuant to the inspection made by him on 2.6.2010. Under section 127 of the Electricity Act, an appeal lies to the Deputy Chief Engineer only from the final order passed by the first respondent. Therefore, the appeals Exts.P10 to P12 presently filed by the petitioners are not maintainable. In such circumstances, I dispose of the writ petition with a direction to the first respondent to pass final orders pursuant to the inspection made by him on 2.6.2010 having regard to the objections submitted by the petitioner expeditiously and in any event, within two months from today and serve a copy of the order to the petitioner immediately thereafter. If the petitioner is aggrieved by the final orders thus passed, it will be open to the petitioner to file an W.P.(C) No.4534 of 2011 3 appeal before the appropriate forum. Exts.P10 to P12 appeals presently on the file of the second respondent shall stand struck off. P.N. RAVINDRAN, JUDGE. nj.