IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN FRIDAY, THE 25TH SEPTEMBER 2009 / 3RD ASWINA 1931 WP(C).No. 27108 of 2009(G) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- E.K.MOHAMMED IQBAL, S/O.BEERANKUTTY PATTIYATTU HOUSE, IRIMBUCHOLA, POST A.R.NAGAR, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.C.M.MOHAMMED IQUABAL RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, VYDYUTHI BHAVAN, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE ASSISTANT ENGINEER, ELECTRICAL SECTION, K.S.E.B., TIRURANGADI. 3. DEPUTY CHIEF ENGINEER, ANTI-POWER THEFT SQUAD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. ADV. SRI.P.P.THAJUDEEN, SC, K.S.E.B FOR R1-3 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25/09/2009,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S. Siri Jagan, J. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= W. P (C) No. 27108 of 2009 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Dated this, the 25th September, 2009. J U D G M E N T The petitioner is a consumer of electricity. On allegations of theft of electricity, a penalty of Rs. 14,34,914/- was imposed on the petitioner. The validity of imposition of that punishment was challenged by the petitioner in W.P(C) No. 39067/2003, wherein, by Ext. P2 judgment, this Court quashed the impugned demand and directed the Board to issue revised demand pursuant thereto. The petitioner's grievance is that the respondents are not taking any steps to implement the said judgment. According to the petitioner, the petitioner had earlier, pending disposal of the appeal filed by the petitioner, paid 20% of the amount demanded as penalty and a further amount of Rs. 1 lakh as a condition for stay in the earlier writ petition. If the revised demands as directed in Ext. P 2 judgment are issued, the petitioner would be entitled to refund of certain amounts. However, respondents 2 and 3 are not taking any steps in that regard, is the grievance of the petitioner. The petitioner now submits that the petitioner has already submitted Exts.P3 and P5 in this regard before the 1st and 2nd respondents respectively. He seeks a direction to dispose of the same. 2. I have heard the learned standing counsel for the Board also. 3. In the facts and circumstances of the case, I dispose of the writ petition with a direction to the 2nd respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext. P5 filed by the petitioner as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, after affording an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner . Sd/- S. Siri Jagan, Judge. Tds/ [True copy] P.S to Judge.