IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH MONDAY, THE 16TH JUNE 2008 / 26TH JYAISHTA 1930 WP(C).No. 17918 of 2008(G) ---------------------------------------------- PETITIONERS: ---------------------- 1. K.C.MOHAMMED IBRAHIM, S/O.MOIDEENKUTTY, MANAPPADAM P.O., PALAKKAD DISTRICT. 2. JAMEELA, W/O.MOHAMMED IBRAHIM MANAPPADAM P.O., PALAKKAD DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.K.R.RAGHUNATH RESPONDENTS: ----------------------- 1. KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, VYDYUTHI BHAVANAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. DEPUTY CHIEF ENGINEER, KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, ELECTRICAL CIRCLE, PALAKKAD. 3. ASSISTANT ENGINEER, KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, ELECTRICAL SECTION, PUDUKODE, PALAKKAD. 4. SUB ENGINEER, KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, ELECTRICAL SUB DIVISION, SQUAD, VADAKKENCHERRY, PALAKKAD. BY SHRI P.P. THAJUDEEN, SC, KSEB. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16/06/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K. M. JOSEPH, J. -------------------------------------- W.P.C. NO. 17918 OF 2008 G -------------------------------------- Dated this the 16th June, 2008 JUDGMENT Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the standing counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent Electricity Board. By consent, the matter has been taken up for final hearing. 2. Briefly put, the case of the petitioners is as follows: The second petitioner is residing with family with power connection No.5306 and is regularly paying bills. Petitioner was issued with Exts.P4 and P5 penal bills under Section 126 of the Electricity Act for Rs.36,000/= each for unauthorised extension. Petitioners preferred Exts.P6 and P7 objections. Petitioners were relegated to prefer Appeals in Ext.P8 Judgment. By Ext.P9 order, the Appeal has been disposed of. Petitioners challenge Ext.P9. Petitioners' complaint is that in Ext.P9 it was found by the Appellate Authority that the provisions of Section 126 have not been complied with and yet it is found that the WPC. 17918/08 G 2 contention that penal bills will not lie, cannot be accepted. Thereafter, the Authority has directed to comply with the provisions of Section 126 and disposed of the Appeal. 3. Having come to the conclusion that the provisions of Section 126 were not complied with, sustaining of the penal bills may not be justified. Probably what the Appellate Authority had in mind was that the procedure has to be complied with. Exts.P4 and P5 bills shall be treated as provisional bills issued under Section 126 of the Act. Ext.P6 and P7 shall be treated as objections of the petitioners against the provisional bills and there will be a direction to the third respondent to consider and take a decision on Exts.P6 and P7 objections in accordance with law after affording an opportunity of being heard to the petitioners. To enable the same, Ext.P9 will stand quashed. The Writ Petition is allowed as above. Sd/= K. M. JOSEPH, JUDGE kbk. // True Copy// PS to Judge WPC. 17918/08 G 3