IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON MONDAY, THE 26TH JULY 2010 / 4TH SRAVANA 1932 WP(C).No. 22950 of 2010(P) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- M.A.ABDUL AMANULLA,S/O.M.ABDURAHIMAN, PROPRIETOR,JAWAHAR POLY PRODUCTS, BY ADV. SRI.P.K.MOHANAN(PALAKKAD) RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE ASSISTANT ENGINEER, ELECTRICAL SECTION(KSEB)PADUR,PALAKKAD-678 548. 2. THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, KSEB,ELECTRICAL MAJOR SECTION,ALATHUR, PALAKKAD DISTRICT,PIN-678541. 3. THE DEPUTY CHIEF ENGINEER,KSEB, ELECTRICAL CIRCLE,T.B.ROAD,PALAKKAD, PIN-678 014. 4. THE KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,VYDYUTHI BHAVANAM, PATTOM,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY SRI.P.P.THAJUDEEN - SC FOR K.S.E.B THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 26/07/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, J --------------------------- W.P(C) No.22950 of 2010-P ---------------------------- Dated this the 26th day of July, 2010. J U D G M E N T The correctness and sustainability of Exts.P1 and P2 bills, which according to the petitioner are quite excessive, are under challenge in Ext.P9 appeal preferred before the third respondent. Many a ground has been raised in the Writ Petition challenging the coercive proceedings being taken in the meanwhile. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, pursuant to Exts.P1 and P2 bills, the petitioner has already satisfied a sum of Rs.1 lakh, along with some other charges as well. It is without any regard to the said payment, Ext.P11 has been issued from the office of the third respondent stating that, the petitioner has to satisfy 50% of the disputed amount with a further sum of Rs.2,000/- as the appeal charges, which made the petitioner to approach this Court. 3. Going by the undisputed facts as borne out by the materials on record, it is obvious that the petitioner has satisfied a sum of Rs.1,00,030/- as per Ext.P7 receipt (towards penal interest W.P(C) No.22950 of 2010-P 2 and re-connection fees). In the above circumstances, the petitioner is permitted to clear the deficit amount; so as to top up the figure to 50% of the impugned bills, which is the statutory requirement to sustain the appeal under the relevant provisions of the Electricity Act 2003, besides the requisite appeal charges. The said amount shall be paid within 'two weeks' from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment and on payment of the said amount, Ext.P9 appeal preferred by the petitioner shall be considered and appropriate orders shall be passed in accordance with law, of course after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate within 'three months' from the date of satisfying the condition as above. Subject to this, recovery proceedings stated as being pursued against the petitioner shall be kept in abeyance till such time. The Writ Petition is disposed of. P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON JUDGE ab W.P(C) No.22950 of 2010-P 3