IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN FRIDAY, THE 20TH NOVEMBER 2009 / 29TH KARTHIKA 1931 WP(C).No. 25236 of 2009(Y) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- JOHNY PAUL THOMAS JOHNSON, PROPRIETOR,BULGAR INDUSTRIES,PLOT NO.42, INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AREA,KOCHUVELI, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADVS. MR.G.SASIDHARAN CHEMPAZHANTHIYIL MR.S.VISHNU RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE ASSTANT ENGINEER, KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, CHACKAI SUB DIVISION,CHACKAI, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, BEACH SECTION,KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, CHACKAI,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, DIVISIONAL OFFICE,KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, SUB STATION,KAZHAKOOTTAM. 4. THE DEPUTY CHIEF ENGINEER (DISTRIBUTION) CIRCLE OFFICE,POWER HOUSE ROAD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 5. THE KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, REP.BY ITS CHAIRMAN,VYDYUTHI BHAVAN,PATTOM. BY ADV. MR.P.P.THAJUDEEN, SC, K.S.E.B FOR R1 TO 5 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 20/11/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 25236 of 2009(Y) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1 - TRUE COPY OF THE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ISSUED BY THE DIC, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. EXT.P2 - TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF CONFIRMATION OF SALE OF IMMOVABLE PROPERTY ISSUED BY THE RECOVERY OFFICER, DEBT RECOVERY TRIBUNAL, ERNAKULAM. EXT.P3 - TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR ELECTRICITY CONNECTION. EXT.P4 - TRUE COPY OF THE SUBMISSION DATED 11.8.2009 SUBMITTED TO THE 4TH RESPONDENT. EXT.P5 - TRUE COPY OF THE REQUEST DATED 11.8.2009 SUBMITTED TO THE 5TH RESPONDENT. EXT.P6 - TRUE COPY OF THE SUBMISSION DATED 11.8.2009 SUBMITTED BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT. EXT.P7 - TRUE COPY OF BOARD ORDER NO. 2124/1993 (TC 1/9490/88 DATED 9.11.1993 ISSUED BY THE SECRETARY, KSEB. EXT.P8 - TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 31.1.2002 IN O.P. NO. 3443/2002 OF THIS COURT. EXT.P9 - TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 15.10.2009 ISSUED BY THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, ELECTRICAL DIVISION, KAZHAKOOTAM. EXT.P10 - TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS DATED 26.10.2009 ISSUED BY THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, ELECTRICAL SUB DIVISION, BEACH. EXT.P11 - TRUE COPY OF THE WILLINGNESS DATED 27.10.2009 ISSUED BY THE PETITIONER. EXT.P12 - TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN W.P.(C) NO. 9006/2009 OF THIS COURT. // TRUE COPY // PA TO JUDGE rhs S. SIRI JAGAN, J ............................................... W.P(C) No. 25236 of 2009 ................................................. Dated this the 20th day of November, 2009 J U D G M E N T The petitioner is an engineering graduate, who has embarked on an industrial venture, for which electricity connection is necessary. He purchased a property in the Industrial development area in Kochuveli in public auction conducted by the Debt Recovery Tribunal, Ernakulam. He obtained an SSI registration for the new industry. He invested substantial amounts in the property. He applied for electricity connection. However, electricity connection has been denied on the ground that arrears of electricity charges due from the former owner of the property, without clearing which electricity connection cannot be given in the same premises. Petitioner's representation to the higher authorities also did not evoke any favourable response. The petitioner submits that in view of Regulation 7 of the terms and conditions of supply 2005, a subsequent owner is not liable for arrears on electricity charges of the previous owner. The petitioner therefore seeks the following reliefs: “1. A writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ, W.P(C) No. 25236 of 2009 -2- order or direction directing the respondents to sanction new electricity connection as requested for by the petitioner in Exhibit P3. 2. A writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the respondents to consider sanctioning new electricity connection to the petitioner's firm without insisting on clearance of arrears of the previous owner. 3. A writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ, order of direction directing the respondents to extend the benefit of Exhibit P7 to the petitioner. ” 2. The learned standing counsel submits that originally Regulation 7 was stayed by the Electricity Regulatory Commission, but later the Commission vacated the stay order. Against the order of Commission, a writ petition was filed by this court, which was also dismissed. The board is stated to have been filed an appeal against that order. The standing counsel contends that in view of the pendency of the appeal the petitioner is not entitled to any reliefs. 3. I have heard both sides. 4. Pursuant to the interim order dated 14.9.2009 a temporary electricity connection has already been given to the petitioner. 5. Admittedly as on today, the Regulation 7 is in force. That being so, the Electricity Board cannot insist on the petitioner W.P(C) No. 25236 of 2009 -3- paying the arrears of electricity charges due from the previous owner of the property in question. Therefore the petitioner is entitled to succeed in this writ petition. Accordingly, the respondents are directed to sanction regular electricity connection to the petitioner without insisting on the payment of arrears of electricity charges due from the previous owner, provided the petitioner complies with all other statutory conditions for granting electricity. The regular electricity connection shall be provided within one month from the date the petitioner complies with all formalities, in the place of the temporary connection already granted as per the interim orders. sd/- S. SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE rhs // True copy // PA to Judge