IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS MONDAY, THE 3RD JANUARY 2011 / 13TH POUSHA 1932 WA.No. 2242 of 2009() --------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN OP.14119/2003 Dated 09/12/2008 .................... APPELLANT(S): RESPONDENT ------------------------ 1. DEPUTY CHIEF ENGINEER, APTS, VYDHUTHI BHAVAN, PATTOM,TRIVANDRUM. 2. ASSISTANT ENGINEER, APTS, KOTTAYAM. 3. ASSISTANT ENGINEER, ELECTRICAL MAJOR SECTION, KSEB, MANIPUZHA, THIRUVALLA. BY ADV. SRI.C.K.KARUNAKARAN, SC FOR KSEB RESPONDENT(S): PETITIONER ------------------------- 1. SUSAMMA MATHEW, W/O.P.K.MATHEW, POOCHERIL HOUSE, ALAMTHURUTHY PO, VENGAL, THIRUVALLA. 2. LEENA MATHEW, W/O.SAJI MATHEW, POOCHERIL HOUSE, ALAMTHURUTHY PO, VENGAL, THIRUVALLA. ADV. SRI.S.SUBHASH CHAND FOR R1 & 2 THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03/01/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS, JJ. ---------------------------------- W.A.No. 2242 of 2009 --------------------------------- Dated, this the 3rd day of January, 2011 J U D G M E N T Ramachandran Nair, J. The Writ Appeal is filed by the Kerala State Electricity Board challenging the judgment of the learned Single Judge vacating the bills raised for the period during which the electrical meter in respondent's industrial unit was not found working. During inspection carried out by the Anti Power Theft Squad on 15/03/2003, the electrical meter in the respondents' industrial unit was not found working for the reason that wires got detached on account of corrosion. Under the Conditions of Supply, the Electricity Board is entitled to estimate power consumption for a maximum period of six months prior to the date of detection of the fact that electrical meter is defective or not recording. Contention of the Electricity Board is that estimation is made for the permitted period of six months during which the meter was not working. Learned counsel for the respondents, who took notice on admission, W.A.No.2242/2009 -2- submitted that there is no basis for estimation of power consumption during the period prior to 15/03/2003, and according to him, the meter was working and all bills were paid regularly. 2. After hearing both sides and after going through the records and the judgment of the learned Single Judge, we feel what is required to be done is only estimation of power consumption based on installed capacity and average consumption recorded after resetting of the meter after inspection which was held on 15/03/2003. If respondent's unit was working on a regular pattern and production was also steady, then consumption will be steady during the whole period. Respondents also have no case that the unit is a seasonal industry. However there are likely to be fluctuations in production and sales depending on market conditions. Therefore, we feel taking of average consumption for one year after connection was restored to the meter on 15/03/2003 for the purpose of estimation of consumption for six months will serve the ends of justice. The Writ Appeal is allowed by vacating the judgment of the learned Single Judge with a direction to the Assistant Engineer to W.A.No.2242/2009 -3- verify 12 months' bills raised after 15/03/2003 i.e. from April, 2003 to March, 2004, and adopt average consumption for six months' periods prior to 15/03/2003 and demand power charges. If the average consumption estimated is same as that of the consumption which was billed and charged for the six months' period prior to 15/03/2003, then there is no need to demand any additional charges. (C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE) (M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS, JUDGE) jg