IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN MONDAY, THE 19TH DECEMBER 2011 / 28TH AGRAHAYANA 1933 WP(C).No. 33554 of 2004(T) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): -------------- Y.PONNACHAN, MURUPEL KIZHAKETHIL, PUTHUMALA P.O., EZHAMKULAM, PATHANAMTHITTA DIST. BY ADV. SRI.R.MANOJ RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, VYDHYUTHI BHAVAN, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DEPUTY CHIEF ENGINEER, KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, PATHANAMTHITTA. 3. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, ELECTRICAL DIVISION, KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, ADOOR. R1 TO R3 BY ADV. SRI.N.N.SUGUNAPALAN, SC, KSEB ADV. P.SANTHALINGAM THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 19/12/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: BKA WP(C).No. 33554 of 2004(T) APPENDIX PETITIONER'(S) EXHIBITS: EXT.P1 COPY OF THE LICENSE OBTAINED BY the PETITIONER FROM THE EZHAMKULAM GRAMA PANCHAYAT DATED 03.09.2002. EXT.P2 COPY OF CONSENT OBTAINED BY THE PETITIONER FROM THE KERALA STATE POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD DATED 18.05.2002 EXT.P3 COPY OF THE DEMAND DRAFT DRAWN IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSISTANT ENGINEER, DATED 21.05.2002. EXT.P4 COPY OF THE PETITION SUBMITTED BY the PETITIONER BEFORE THE CHAIRMAN OF THE ELECTRICITY BOARD. EXT.P5 COPY OF THE PETITION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.P6 COPY OF THE PETITION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE CHIEF MINISTER DATED 06.11.2002. EXT.P7 COPY OF THE COMPLAINT SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE RESPECTIVE MINISTER FOR ELECTRICITY DATED 24.01.2003. EXT.P8 COPY OF THE CHEQUE ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER DATED 01.09.2003. EXT.P9 COPY OF THE REQUEST SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 10.03.2004. EXT.P10 COPY OF THE LOAN SANCTION LETTER ISSUED BY STATE BANK OF TRANVANCORE, DATED 18.04.2002. RESPONDENT'(S) EXHIBITS: NIL //TRUE COPY// PA TO JUDGE BKA K. VINOD CHANDRAN, J. ------------------------------------------ WP(C) NO. 33554 OF 2004 ------------------------------------------ Dated this the 19th day of December, 2011 J U D G M E N T This writ petition filed by a would-have-been entrepreneur highlights grievances of one who showed the “temerity” to attempt to start an industry in the state. The petitioner applied for a license to start an industry to carry on Aluminium Coating Plant along with a workshop for Aluminium Fabrication. The unit, which was registered as a partnership firm was granted license from the Ezhamkulam Grama Panchayath by Ext.P1. The petitioner also was granted consent to establish the unit by Ext.P2 dated 18.05.2002 issued by the Kerala State Pollution Control Board. After complying with the formalities, the petitioner deposited an amount of Rs.4,96,000/- (Rupees four lakhs ninety six thousand only) by way of Ext.P3 demand draft drawn in favour of Electrical Engineer, Ezhamkulam. For unknown reasons, the petitioners connection was not WP(C) NO. 33554 OF 2004 ..2.. granted by the Electricity Board and the Kerala State Electricity Board, herein represented by its Secretary, 1st respondent; the Deputy Chief Engineer, 2nd respondent; and the Executive Engineer, Electrical Division, 3rd respondent; have chosen to file absolutely no counter affidavit controverting the averments of the petitioner. 2. Exts.P4 to P7 representations were made by the petitioner to various authorities for expediting power connection to the unit, which was applied under the OYEC scheme and had remitted the entire amounts demanded under the scheme. The representations highlighted the fact that the petitioner had taken considerable financial assistance from a nationalised bank and had expended the same along with own funds to set up the industry and that the only impediment in starting the industry was the non-availability of power connection, which he had applied for under the OYEC scheme. Despite the various representations, the petitioner contends that not only was the electrical connection not WP(C) NO. 33554 OF 2004 ..3.. drawn to the petitioner's premises, but no response was received from the Board or its authorities explaining the failure or inability to draw such connection. However, on 03.09.2003, the petitioner received a cheque of the Executive Engineer, Electrical Division, drawn on the State Bank of Travancore for an amount of Rs.4,72,184/- (Rupees four lakhs seventy two thousand one hundred and eighty four only). Ext.P8 again was not accompanied by any explanation and petitioner could only assume that the amounts kept back by the Board was by way of expences incurred for the installation of posts for the purpose of drawing connection. In the circumstances, the petitioner was constrained to again approach the Board with Ext.P9 representation in which he highlighted the fact that he was never given connection and also that the Board had drawn other power lines enabling other power connections through the post installed at his expense. In such circumstances, the petitioner sought refund of the amounts kept back by the Board coming to Rs.23,816/- WP(C) NO. 33554 OF 2004 ..4.. (Rupees twenty three thousand eight hundred and sixteen only) and had also demanded 14% interest for the period of one year and four months during which his deposit for OYEC remained with the Board. 3. As stated earlier, no counter affidavit is filed in the above matter and the averments of the petitioner remain uncontroverted. The petitioner, having deposited the money for OYEC connection, at least deserves a reply explaining the reasons for not granting the same. The Board not only failed to give the petitioner any explanation, but also kept the money with the Board for a period of one year and four months when the petitioner was running from pillar to post to get the connection applied for by the petitioner and start the industry. The Board, while refunding the amounts also offered no explanation for not drawing the connection or for not refunding the full amount deposited by the petitioner under OYEC scheme. This recalcitrant attitude of the Board cannot be countenanced by any reasonable person. In the WP(C) NO. 33554 OF 2004 ..5.. above circumstances and for reason of the petitioner's averments remaining uncontroverted, it is directed that the respondents 1 to 3 shall pay the petitioner 10% interest on the amount of Rs.4,72,184/- (Rupees four lakhs seventy two thousand one hundred and eighty four only) for the period between the realisation of Ext.P3 draft and Ext.P8 cheque. The respondents 1 to 3 shall also refund the balance amount of Rs. 23,816/- again with 10% interest from the date of realisation of Ext.P3 draft till payment of the same. The petitioner shall produce a copy of this judgment before the authorities of the Kerala State Electricity Board within a period of two weeks from today and payment shall be made by the Board within three months therefrom. This writ petition is allowed as above with costs of the petitioner quantified at Rs.5,000/- (Rupees five thousand only) payable by the respondents. K. VINOD CHANDRAN, JUDGE bka/-