IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN TUESDAY, THE 12TH FEBRUARY 2008 / 23RD MAGHA 1929 OP.No. 1920 of 1997(C) ------------------------------------ PETITIONER: -------------------- DIRECTOR, DIVINE RETREAT CENTRE, MURINGOOR, CHALAKUDY. BY ADV. SRI.FIROZ K.ROBIN RESPONDENTS: ----------------------- 1. KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, VYDYUTHI BHAVAN, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. DEPUTY CHIEF ENGINEER, APTS, K.S.E.B, VYDYUTHI BHAVAN, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, ELECTRICAL MAJOR SECTION, KORATTY. 4. ASST.EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, K.S.E.B. APTS, REGIONAL UNIT, ERNAKULAM. BY ADV. SRI.P.SANTHALINGAM, SC, KSEB R1 TO R4 BY SRI.C.K.KARUNAKARAN, SC FOR KSEB THIS ORIGINAL PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 12/02/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss ORDER ON C.M.P.NO.3420/1997 IN O.P.NO.1920/1997 C DISMISSED 12/02/2008 SD/- P.N.RAVINDRAN, JUDGE APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1: COPY OF THE ORDER DTD. 10/01/97 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.P2: COPY OF THE INVOICE ISSUED TO CONSUMER NO.5500 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT. EXT.P3: COPY OF THE INVOICE TO CONSUMER NO.5757. EXT.P4: COPY OF THE INVOICE TO CONSUMER NO.210. EXT.P5: COPY OF THE MODIFIED INVOICE ISSUED TO CONSUMER NO.5500. EXT.P6: COPY OF THE ORDER DTD. 24/08/93 OF THE CHIEF ELECTRICAL INSPECTOR. /TRUE COPY/ P.S.TO JUDGE Kss P.N.Ravindran, J. =============== O.P.No.1920 of 1997 ================ Dated this the 12th day of February, 2008. JUDGMENT The petitioner, a consumer of electrical energy challenges the levy of penalty for unauthorised extension of connected load, both on the fixed charges and the energy charges. By Ext.P1, the second respondent rejected the contention of the petitioner that penal charges can be levied only on the fixed charge portion and not on the energy charges which have already been paid for. The learned counsel brought to my notice that the point raised in the original petition is covered in favour of the petitioner by the decision of this court in O.P.No.10068 of 1996, which was upheld in W.A.No.538 of 2004. A Division Bench of this Court has in W.A.No.538 of 2004 and connected cases held that in respect of misuse of energy detected prior to 18.9.2002, where theft of energy is not involved, penalty can be levied only on the unauthorised extension of connected load and not on the energy charges for the energy consumed in excess of the limits. OP 1920/97 -: 2 :- 2. In the light of the said decision, Exts.P1 to P5 to the extent they impose penalty on the energy charges portion are set aside and the respondents are directed to issue fresh invoices taking note of the payments if any already made by the petitioner. The original petition is allowed as above. No costs. P.N.Ravindran, Judge. ess 15/2