IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN FRIDAY, THE 30TH SEPTEMBER 2011 / 8TH ASWINA 1933 WP(C).No. 26018 of 2011(B) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- INDIAN OIL CORPORATION LTD., HAVING ITS KERALA STATE OFFICE AT PANAMPILLY NAGAR, KOCHI-682036, REP.BY ITS SENIOR DIVISIONAL MANAGER (RETAIL SALES), V.R.MENON. BY ADV. SRI.P.GOPAKUMARAN NAIR SRI.C.S.DIAS SRI.N.K.SUBRAMANIAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1.KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, VYDHYUDHI BHAVAN, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695004, REP.BY ITS SPECIAL OFFICER (REVENUE). 2. DEPUTY CHIEF ENGINEER, K.S.E.B, ELECTRICAL DIVISION, T.B.ROAD, PALAKKAD- 678014. 3. ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, K.S.E.B, ELECTRICAL DIVISION, BIG BAZAR, PALAKKAD-678014. 4. TAHSILDAR (REVENUE RECOVERY), COLLECTORATE, KAKKANADU, ERNAKULAM-682030. 5. STATE OF KERALA, REP.BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695039. BY SRI.K.M.SATHYANATHA MENON, SC FOR KSEB GOVT.PLEADER, SRI.G.GOPAKUMAR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 30/09/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: SU WP.C.NO.26018/2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1: COPY OF THE LETTER NO.DBI/HT/IOC/2005/832 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER DT.10/5/2005. P2: COPY OF THE LETTER NO.CDO:R:PKD-32 SENT BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT DT.12/8/2005. P3: COPY OF THE LETTER NO.DBI/HT/IOC/2005/2664 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER DT.20/12/2005. P4: COPY OF THE LETTER NO.CDO:R:PKD-32 ISSUED BY THE PETITIONER TO 2ND RESPONDENT DT.21/12/2005. P5: COPY OF THE LETTER NO.CDO:R:PKD-31 ISSUED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT DT.14/2/2006. P6: COPY OF THE LETTER NO.CDO:R:PKD-32 ISSUED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT DT.31/3/2006. P7: COPY OF THE LETTER NO.HTB/17/1741 DT.21/6/2006 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT WITH A COPY TO THE PETITIONER. P8: COPY OF THE LETTER NO.DBI/HT/IOCL/2006-07/4332 ISSUED BY 2ND RESPONDENT TO PETITIONER D.15/3/2007. P9: COPY OF THE LETTER NO.KDO:R:PKD-32 SENT BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT 4/6/2007. P10: COPY OF THE LETTER NO.KDO:R:PKD-32 SENT BY THE PETITIONER TO THE HON'BLE MINISTER FOR ELECTRICITY, GOVT. OF KERALA DT.4/6/2007. P11: COPY OF THE LETTER NO.HTB/17/1741 DT.28/2/2011 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO THE 4TH RESPONDENT WITH COPY TO THE PETITIONER P12: COPY OF THE ORDER IN O.P.NO.1/2011-12 PASSED BY THE CONSUMER GRIEVANCE REDRESSAL FORUM, KOZHIKODE DT.22/8/2011. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL. /TRUE COPY/ PS TO JUDGE SU P.N. RAVINDRAN, J. ------------------------------- W.P (C) No. 26018 of 2011 ------------------------------- Dated this the 30th day of September, 2011 J U D G M E N T Ext.P12 order passed by the Consumer Grievance Redressal Forum, Northern Region, Kozhikode on 22.8.2011, which according to the petitioner was served on it on 5.9.2011, is under challenge in this writ petition. 2. Under Regulation 21(2) of the Kerala State Electricity Regulatory Commission (Consumer Grievance Redressal Forum and Electricity Ombudsman) Regulations, 2005, the petitioner can challenge Ext.P12 in appeal before the Electricity Ombudsman. The period of limitation prescribed for filing an appeal is 30 days from the date of receipt of the order passed by the Consumer Grievance Redressal Forum. The said period has not so far expired. The petitioner has thus an effective and meaningful alternate remedy by way of appeal wherein it can challenge the validity of Ext.P12. The learned counsel for the petitioner however submitted that revenue recovery proceedings following the impugned demand were initiated on 28.2.2011 itself and in view of Ext.P12 order, the Board is taking hasty steps to proceed with the revenue recovery. The learned counsel submitted that in such circumstances in order to enable the W.P.(C) No.26018 of 2011 2 petitioner to move the Electricity Ombudsman and seek appropriate interim orders, recovery pursuant to Ext.P11 may be kept in abeyance for a short period. Sri.K.M.Sathyanatha Menon, the learned standing counsel appearing for the Kerala State Electricity Board did not oppose the said request. That apart, as the petitioner is a public sector oil company, the Board need not have any apprehension that it will be able to realise the amount due from it, if ultimately the petitioner is found liable. I accordingly dispose of the writ petition with a direction to the respondents to keep the revenue recovery proceedings in abeyance for a period of three weeks from today in order to enable the petitioner to move the Electricity Ombudsman in appeal and seek appropriate interim orders. The contentions of both sides on the merits are kept open. P.N. RAVINDRAN, JUDGE. nj. P.N.RAVINDRAN, J. -------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.26018 of 2011 JUDGMENT Dated:- 30th September, 2011 --------------------------------------