IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC TUESDAY, THE 5TH APRIL 2011 / 15TH CHAITHRA 1933 WP(C).No. 10387 of 2011(W) ----------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- AIRDALE SYSTEMS PRIVATE LIMITED, 15/385, HIGH SCHOOL ROAD, MARADU, KOCHI-682 304, REPRESENTED BY ITS EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MATHEW GEORGE. BY ADV. SMT.SHAHNA KARTHIKEYAN SMT.A.JAISY JOSE RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, KERALA WATER AUTHORITY, WATER SUPPLY DIVISION, THRIPUNITHURA-682 301. 2. EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, KERALA WATER AUTHORITY, ERNAKULAM-682 016. R1 & R2 BY ADV.SRI.M. DINESH, SC FOR KWA THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05/04/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: sts ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ================ W.P.(C) NO. 10387 OF 2011 ===================== Dated this the 5th day of April, 2011 J U D G M E N T Petitioner is a consumer of the Kerala Water Authority. 2. Ext.P3 is a bill issued to the petitioner demanding an amount of `48,000/-. On receipt of Ext.P3, petitioner filed Ext.P6 appeal. Soon thereafter, petitioner was issued Ext.P7, a bill demanding total amount of `1,21,078/-, the bifurcation of which is stated thus:- 1. Arrears of water charge upto 11/2010 (minimum) - `48535/- 2. Additional water charge imposed as per findings of Anti Water Theft Squad @ 2 KL per day by deducting the above minimum water charge - `62543/- 3. Fine imposed for using non- domestic connection for Industrial purpose - `10000/- Total - `1,21,078/- 3. It was thereupon that this writ petition was filed complaining mainly about the aforesaid demands and the consequential disconnection of water supply. 4. During the pendency of this writ petition, petitioner has WPC No. 10387/11 :2 : been issued Ext.P10, an invoice demanding payment of the amount as mentioned in Ext.P7. 5. Standing Counsel who has obtained instructions in the matter submits that an inspection was conducted in the premises of the petitioner, where misuse of water supply was found. It was stated that it was thereupon that Ext.P3 was issued followed by Exts.P7 and P10. 6. The controversy raised by the parties involve resolution of disputed questions of fact. These are disputes which are incapable of resolution in a proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The remedy available to the consumer like the petitioner is to pursue the appellate remedy under the regulations framed by the respondents themselves and the petitioner has already invoked the appellate remedy by filing Ext.P6. 7. Therefore, I direct the Appellate authority, the 2nd respondent, to consider Ext.P6 with notice to the petitioner and pass orders thereon as expeditiously as possible, at any rate within 6 weeks of production of a copy of this judgment. 8. As already stated, the water supply to the petitioner's WPC No. 10387/11 :3 : premises has been disconnected w.e.f. 7/1/11. Having regard to the fact that the matter is still pending consideration of the appellate authority, I direct that, on the petitioner remitting 50% of the amount due as per Exts.P7 and P10, the supply to the petitioner's premises will be restored forthwith. Writ petition is disposed of as above. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp