IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR FRIDAY, THE 19TH SEPTEMBER 2008 / 28TH BHADRA 1930 OP.No. 34318 of 2001(I) ----------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ A.R.AJAYAGHOSH, MEYYATTINGAL HOUSE, EDAPPALLY, COCHIN - 24. BY ADV. SRI.N.K.MOHANLAL RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. DEPUTY TAHSILDAR (RR), KANAYANNUR TALUK, ERNAKULAM, COCHIN - 11. 2. VILLAGE OFFICER, EDAPPALLY NORTH, KOCHI - 24. 3. ACCOUNTS OFFICER, BILLING SUPERVISION UNIT, KSEB, ERNAKULAM, COCHIN - 18. BY ADV. SRI.KODOTH SREEDHARAN, SC, KSEB FOR R3 SHRI.C.K.KARUNAKARAN, SC, KSEB THIS ORIGINAL PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 19/09/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: OP NO.34318/2001 ORDER ON CMP NO.56018/2001 IN OP NO.34318/2001 DISMISSED. 19/09/2008 SD/- (C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS P1 : COPY OF JUDGMENT IN OP NO.1060/97 OF THE DISTRICT CONSUMER REDRESSAL FORUM, ERNAKULAM. P2 : COPY OF CURRENT BILL DATED 23/04/1999 ISSUED BY KSEB FOR RS.4,298/-. P3 : COPY OF RECEIPT DATED 10/05/1999 FOR RS.4,298/- ISSUED BY KSEB. P4 : COPY OF REVENUE RECOVERY DEMAND NOTICE DATED 14/09/2001 ISSUED BY 1ST RESPONDENT TO PETITIONER. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS ANNEXURE 1 : COPYH OF THE ORDER NO.LBII/15334/97 DATED 09/02/2000 ISSUED by the SECRETARY OF THE KSE BOARD. //TRUE COPY// PA TO JUDGE. jg C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. ------------------------- O.P. No. 34318 of 2001 --------------------------------- Dated, this the 19th day of September, 2008 J U D G M E N T Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned standing counsel appearing for the Kerala State Electricity Board. 2. Challenge is against recovery proceedings initiated for recovery of arrears of electricity charges due from the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner has relied on the details furnished in the revenue recovery notice and contended that demand is only for the period 01/93 to 10/93, which is only fixed charges with surcharge, which according to the petitioner was paid through Ext.P2 receipt. However, learned standing counsel for the KSEB has clarified that the amount paid by the petitioner vide Ext.P2 receipt is fixed charges payable by him together with interest for six months from the date of disconnection, which was based on Ext.P1 award passed by the CDRF in a complaint failed by the petitioner. Learned standing counsel for the KSEB stated that the amount demanded under RR notice is the arrears of electricity charges payable by the petitioner pursuant to APTS O.P.No.34318/2001 -2- inspection conducted in 1991 and the demand was Rs.18,260/-, which with surcharge is the amount mentioned in the impugned RR notice. The petitioner has no case that he has paid the arrears of electricity bills amounting to Rs.18,260/- with surcharge thereon because the said liability, which was also under challenge before the CDRF, was not interfered by the CDRF in their order. Probably, petitioner could have filed statutory appeal against the demand as the CDRF fairly gave freedom to the petitioner for the same. In the absence of any challenge against the demand of arrear bills, it could be recovered with surcharge. Even though, mistake may be committed by the revenue recovery authorities in mentioning nature of liability in the RR notice, the same is not going to affect the entitlement of KSEB to recover the arrears from the petitioner. However, having regard to the fact that petitioner is a small industrial unit, which remained closed from 1993 onwards, I feel, reduction in surcharge can be granted provided petitioner clears the arrears of electricity bills i.e. Rs.18,260/- with 50% thereof towards surcharge within a reasonable time. Accordingly, the balance O.P.No.34318/2001 -3- liability due under the impugned RR notice and the subsequent accrual of interest / surcharge will stand waived, if petitioner remits Rs.27,390/- on or before 15/11/2008. However, if petitioner does not discharge the liability as above, entire liability will be recovered with full surcharge, thereafter. The original petition is disposed of as above. (C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE) jg