IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN WEDNESDAY, THE 18TH AUGUST 2010 / 27TH SRAVANA 1932 WP(C).No. 40146 of 2003(D) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- THE KERALA STATE TRANSPORT EMPLOYEES' CO-OP. SOCIETY LTD., NO. 4206, ALAPPUZHA, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY V.A. SIDHARTHAN. BY ADV. SRI.N.UNNIKRISHNAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, TRANSPORT BHAVAN, FORT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, REP. BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR. 2. THE DISTRICT TRANSPORT OFFICER, K.S.R.T.C., ALAPPUZHA. ADV. SRI.V.V.NANDAGOPAL NAMBIAR,SC, KSRTC FOR R1 & 2 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 18/08/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY, DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: W.P.C.NO. 40146/2003 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- EXT.P1 TRUE COPY OF LETTER DT. 18-8-2000. EXT.P2 LETTER DT. 17-6-2003. EXT.P3 LETTER DT. 3-7-2003. EXT.P4 LETTER DT. 5-8-2003. EXT.P5 REPRESENTATION DT. 11-8-2003 EXT.P6 JUDGMENT IN W.P.C.NO. 27984/2003. EXT.P7 REPRESENTATION DT. 8-10-2003. EXT.P8 LETTER DT. 3-12-2003. [TRUE COPY] P.S TO JUDGE. S. Siri Jagan, J. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= W.P(C) No. 40146 of 2003 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Dated this, the 18th day of August, 2010. J U D G M E N T The petitioner is an employees' co-operative society at Alappuzha, of which the employees of the Kerala State Road Transport Corporation are members. A room belonging to the Kerala State Road Transport Corporation was allotted to the petitioner- society on rental basis. According to the petitioner, the rent payable is including electricity charges, which was being paid regularly by the society. In support of the petitioner's contention that the rent includes electricity charges also the petitioner has produced Ext. P1 letter from the District Transport Officer to the Secretary of the society, wherein revised rate of rent has been intimated to the petitioner for various periods, which shows that the rent includes electricity charges as well. But, the petitioner was served with Ext. P2 letter from the District Transport Officer that it has been directed to realise electricity charges from the petitioner-society with arrears from the beginning of functioning of the society in the premises of the Corporation at the rates mentioned therein. The petitioner filed Ext. P3 reply stating that they are not bound to pay electricity charges separately, that too, at such a huge rates insofar as they are only using two lights and two fans functioning only on working days, that too, during working hours in the day time. According to the petitioner, no separate electricity meter is installed to record the consumption of electricity by the petitioner. Despite the same, by Ext. P4, the petitioner was directed to pay an amount of Rs. 74,200/- stated to be arrears of electricity charges. The petitioner filed a detailed representation Ext. P5 to the Managing Director of the Kerala State Road Transport Corporation against the demand. By Ext. P6 judgment in W.P(C) No. 27984/2003, this Court directed the Managing Director to consider and pass orders on the same. The W.P.C. No. 40146/2003 -: 2 :- petitioner submitted an additional representation Ext. P7 before the Managing Director. After considering the contentions of the petitioner, by Ext. P8, the Managing Director rejected the representation of the petitioner. It is under the above circumstances, the petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking the following reliefs: “(i) Call for the records leading to the issuance of Exts.P2, P4 and P8; (ii) declare that in view of Ext. P1, the demand raised in Exts.P2, P4 and P8 letter are unsustainable and therefore, is liable to be quashed; (iii) issue a writ of certiorari or appropriate writ or order or direction quashing Exts.P2, P4 and P8.” 2. According to the petitioner, there was no agreement for paying electricity charges separately in addition to the rent agreed. The petitioner would contend that the rent included electricity charges as well. In support of his contention, apart from Ext. P1, the petitioner points out that no separate electricity meter is provided for the connection to the petitioner. Therefore, there is no way to ascertain the amount of electricity consumed by the petitioner, is the contention of the petitioner. That is exactly why electricity charges were included in the rent itself, contends the petitioner. The petitioner therefore submits that the petitioner is not liable to pay arrears of electricity charges now demanded by the respondents. 3. A counter affidavit is filed on behalf of the Kerala State Road Transport Corporation, wherein the contention taken is that the usual agreement to be executed for the rental arrangement contain a clause to the effect that “the lessee shall pay the rent, current and water charges as fixed by the lessor as per Rules in this regard from time to time.” The petitioner did not execute that agreement although W.P.C. No. 40146/2003 -: 3 :- they were bound to is their contention. According to the respondents, the petitioner has not paid electricity charges from 1-1-1986 onwards, which only has been demanded from the petitioner. While admitting that there is no separate electricity meter provided, the learned counsel for the Kerala State Road Transport Corporation would argue that the practice followed by the Kerala State Road Transport Corporation is that the total electricity charges are divided among all the tenants and proportionate amount is demanded from the petitioner also. The respondents would therefore argue to sustain the demand for arrears of electricity charges. 4. A reply has been filed by the petitioner, wherein the contention regarding the execution of the agreement is denied. They would reiterate that the rent included electricity charges as well and even otherwise, after having issued Ext. P1 fixing rent including electricity charges also, the respondents cannot recover arrears of electricity charges separately. 5. I have considered the rival contentions in detail. 6. Although the standing counsel for the Kerala State Road Transport Corporation would contend that the petitioner has deliberately protracted signing of the agreement, even the form of that agreement is not produced before this Court. It is not disputed before me that no separate electricity meter is provided for ascertaining the consumption of electricity by the petitioner. The petitioner has, in Ext. P3, stated that they are using only two tube lights and two fans, which are used only during working hours during day time on working days. According to them, the very same working days as applicable to Government offices are applicable to the society also. Ext. P1 letter dated 18-8-2000 issued by the District Transport Officer to the society is not disputed by the respondents. In the same, W.P.C. No. 40146/2003 -: 4 :- the petitioner has been informed by the District Transport Officer that the rent payable by the society is being revised as stated therein. In Ext. P1, at three places, it is specifically stated that what is demanded is rent per month including current charges. That would lead to the natural inference that the rent payable by the society includes current charges as well. The fact that no separate electricity meter is provided for ascertaining the electricity consumption of the petitioner supports such an inference also. Further, the fact that for 17 years the Kerala State Road Transport Corporation did not care to demand electricity charges from the petitioner would also support such an inference. Therefore, I am inclined to hold that the rent fixed for the petitioner is inclusive of current charges as well. That being so, the respondents cannot now demand arrears of electricity charges as has been done by the impugned orders. Accordingly, Exts.P2, P4 and P8 are quashed. It is declared that the petitioner is not liable to pay electricity charges in addition to the rent already paid by the petitioner insofar as the rent includes electricity charges as well. The writ petition is allowed as above. Sd/- S. Siri Jagan, Judge. Tds/