IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN MONDAY, THE 10TH MARCH 2008 / 20TH PHALGUNA 1929 WP(C).No. 23817 of 2005(I) ------------------------------------ PETITIONER: ----------------- P.K.NARAYANAN, S/O.LATE KUNJURAMAN, KRISHNA VILASOM, KARTHIKA REGENCY, EDAPPALLY. BY ADV. SRI.SANTHOSH MATHEW SRI.SATHISH NINAN RESPONDENTS: ---------------------- 1. THE KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, VYDYUTHI BHAVANAM, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DEPUTY CHIEF ENGINEER, K.S.E.BOARD, ELECTRICAL CIRCLE, ERNAKULAM. 3. THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, K.S.E.B. ANTI POWER THEFT SQUAD, I.B.COMPOUND, PALAKKAD. 4. THE ASSISTANT ENGINEER, K.S.E.B. ELECTRICAL SECTION, EDAPPALLY, KOCHI 20. 5. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KALAMASSERY POLICE STATION, KALAMASSERY. ADV. SRI. P.P. THAJUDEEN - SC, KSEB THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 10/03/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C) NO: 23817/2005 I APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS EXT.P1. COPY OF THE SITE MAHAZAR DT. 17/2/2005 PREPARED BY THE R3. EXT.P2. COPY OF THE NEWS ITEM PUBLISHED IN MATHRUBHOOMI DAILY DT. 18/2/2005. EXT.P3. COPY OF THE LETTER NO. BS. 2005/06/217/18/2/2005 WITH INVOICE NO. 94693 DATED NIL 18/2/2005 BY THE R4 TO THE PETITIONER. EXT.P4. COPY OF THE STATEMENT SHOWING THE DETAILS OF METER READING AND CONSUMPTION OF CONSUMER NO. 3483 OF ELECTRICAL SECTION, EDAPPALLY FROM 15/3/2003. EXT.P5. COPY OF THE OBJECTION DT. 19/2/2005 BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE R4. EXT.P6. COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DT. 23/2/2005 IN WPC NO. 6240/2005 OF THIS COURT. EXT.P7. COPY OF THE RECEIPT NO. 55442502050233 DT. 25/2/2005 BY THE R4 TO THE PETITIONER. EXT.P8. COPY OF THE STATEMENT DT. 11/3/2005 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE R4. EXT.P9. COPY OF THE LETTER NO. ES.EPY/05-06/18/DT. 13/5/2005 BY R4 TO THE PETITIONER. EXT.P10. COPY OF THE APPEAL DT. 6/6/05 BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE R2. EXT.P11. COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DT. 13/6/05 IN WPC NO. 17688/05 OF THIS COURT. EXT.P12. COPY OF THE RECEIPT DT. 24/6/2005 BY THE R4 TO THE PETITIONER. EXT.P13. COPY OF THE ORDER NO. GB1/74/2005/1871 DT. 13/07/2005 OF THE R2. EXT.P14. COPY OF THE CALCULATION SHEET NO. BS.2005/06 262/DATED 2/08/2005 BY THE R4 TO THE PETITIONER. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS NIL. True copy tga THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = WP(C).No.23817 of 2005-I = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 10th day of March, 2008. JUDGMENT 1.This writ petition is filed challenging the order under Section 127 of the Electricity Act. The premises is a bar hotel. It also has a lodging facility. The restaurant and the bar are covered by a separate connection which is the subject matter of dispute between the parties. One of the predominant issues argued on behalf of the petitioner is that in terms of the abkari laws, there is a prohibition for running a bar on certain days and also for certain period of time on every day and if such restrictions are taken into reasonable consideration in terms of the licence and the abkari laws, there could not be WP(C)23817/2005 -: 2 :- any assessment fixed at 20 hours per day. 2.Having considered the contents of Ext.P13, I am of the view that the case of the petitioner requires a reconsideration at the hands of the appellate authority since none of such relevant facts has been taken into consideration particularly when the installation appears to include certain chilling equipments etc. 3.As noticed by this Court, while passing the interim order on 10-8-2005, the petitioner is stated to have paid much in excess of the amount which would be covered by the impugned order. 4.In the result, the impugned Ext.P13 is quashed and the second respondent is directed to extent the petitioner a further opportunity of being heard and to decide the issue afresh. Let that be done within an outer limit of four months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The interim order dated 10-8-2005 will continue until a WP(C)23817/2005 -: 3 :- decision is taken by the second respondent as directed above. The writ petition is disposed of accordingly. THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN, JUDGE. Sha/