IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN THURSDAY, THE 17TH NOVEMBER 2011 / 26TH KARTHIKA 1933 WP(C).No. 6493 of 2006(W) ----------------------------------- PETITIONER : - ---------------------- PADINJAREKARA AGENCIES PRIVATE LTD., P.B.NO.22, KOTTAYAM-1, REP. BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR. BY ADVS. SRI.J. JULIAN XAVIER SRI.FIROZ K.ROBIN RESPONDENTS : - -------------------------- 1. KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, VYDYUTHI BHAVAN, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. DEPUTY CHIEF ENGINEER (APTS), K.S.E.B., VYDYUTHI BHAVAN, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. ASST. EXE. ENGINEER, KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, ELECTRICAL SUB DIVISION, KOTTAYAM CENTRAL, KOTTAYAM. R1 TO R3 BY ADV. SRI. P. SANTHALINGAM, S.C FOR K.S.E.B ADV. SRI. JOSE J.MATHEIKEL THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 17/11/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 6493 of 2006(W) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT P1 : COPY OF THE PENAL BILL DATED 24.04.2002 ISSUED BY THE 3rd RESPONDENT. EXT P2 : COPY OF THE APPEAL DATED 27.04.2002 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2nd RESPONDENT. EXT P3 : COPY OF THE FORWARDING LETTER DATED 09.05.2002 BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 3rd RESPONDENT. EXT P3 (a) : COPY OF THE RECEIPT DATED 09.05.2002 FOR THE REMITTANCE OF Rs. 28, 328/-. EXT P4 : COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 31.01.2006 PASSED BY THE 2nd RESPONDENT. EXT P5 : COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 23.05.2001. EXT P6 : COPY OF THE B.O. NO. 291/ 91 (Plg. Com 3546 / 98) DATED 02.02.99. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL. TRUE COPY P.A. TO JUDGE DMR/- S. SIRI JAGAN, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C)No.6493 of 2006 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 17th day of November, 2011 J U D G M E N T The petitioner is a consumer of electricity. He was found using unauthorised additional load of 9 KW. For the same, the petitioner was asked to pay penalty for fixed charges as well as energy charges demanding a total amount of Rs.94,424/-. According to the petitioner, as decided by this court in George Joseph v. K.S.E.B [2008 (4) KLT 610] for unauthorised additional load, in the absence of any allegation of theft of electricity, penalty can be imposed only under Regulation 42 of the erstwhile Conditions of Supply of Electrical Energy, 1990, only on fixed charges and not on energy charges. The petitioner therefore seeks the following reliefs: “i. to call for the records connected with the case leading to Ext.P1 and P4 and quash the same by issuing a writ of certiorari; ii. to declare that petitioner is liable to pay penalty only for the fixed charges in the light of the judgment in W.A. No.1231/2003 of this Hon'ble Court. W.P.(C)No.6493 of 2006 -2- iii. To direct the 2nd respondent to reconsider the appeal in the light of the judgment in W.A. No.1231/2003 and connected cases.” 2. Ext.P1 is the original demand and Ext.P4 is the order in appeal. 3. I have heard the learned Standing Counsel for the Kerala State Electricity Board also. 4. In George Joseph's case (supra) cited by the counsel for the petitioner, I have categorically held that in respect of unauthorised additional load what is applicable is Regulation 42 of Conditions of Supply of Electrical Energy and Regulation 43 relating to theft of electrical energy cannot be relied upon. I have further held that under Regulation 42, for unauthorised additional load, penalty can be imposed only on fixed charges and not on energy charges. Therefore, the impugned orders to the extent the petitioner has been asked to pay penalty on energy charges is quashed. The respondents are directed to issue fresh demand confining the penalty to three times fixed charges alone which shall be paid by the petitioner. Amounts W.P.(C)No.6493 of 2006 -3- already paid as per the orders of this court or as a condition for entertaining the appeal shall be adjusted against the amount payable as above. If any excess amount has been paid by the petitioner, the same shall be refunded to the petitioner within one month from the date of passing of the revised order. Revised orders shall be passed within one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The writ petition is disposed of as above. Sd/- S. SIRI JAGAN JUDGE //True copy// P.A. TO JUDGE shg/